| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi,
the crafting costs for this item are specified as 2,695 gp, the CL ist 7.
This is a +1 stanching armor which needs 3 spells to craft:
- stabilize (Wiz 0)
- anticipate peril (Wiz 1)
- lesser restauration (Wiz 2) (or: cure critical wounds)
Anticipate peril can be used once per day giving a +3 on initiative checks (+3: Level 3 wizard).
How are the 2,695 gp and the CL7 calculated?
Padded armor, masterwork: 5gp (or halved?) + 150gp
+1 stanching: 2000 gp
How do I calculate the spell/once per day use costs? And the CL of the item?
Thanks and BR.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Before we dig in, it's important to note that Akhentepi's Armor is a specific named magic item. Named item costs aren't usually set by a hard and fast set of rules. There's as much art as math in pricing such items. This is going to be important when we get to the conclusion.
The CL of the item is set by the CL of the highest-level ability on it. Stanching is CL 7, therefore the item as a whole is CL 7. (Stanching is that level because that is the minimum caster level for cure critical wounds.)
You've got the pricing for +1 stanching padded armor right. 2155 gp. Which means that the pricing for the anticipate peril part is 540 gp.
What's the "book value" of this ability? It's a once per day use-activated spell effect. So Spell Level x caster level x 2000 / 5. 1x7x2000/5= 2800gp. We could maybe price it as CL3 since you're only getting a +3 to initiative checks, so that would only be 1200 gp. Multiply by 1.5 since it's a different ability on top of the +1 stanching for a total cost of 1800 gp. Half that as the crafting price for 900 gp.
Command word pricing is probably not the right choice since you gain the effects of the spell, not the spell itself. If it was command-word you would use the command word as a standard action to cast the spell, and then could gain the effect as a free action any time during the spell's duration.
In addition anticipate peril probably needed to be CL7. We aren't 100% clear on this, though. Spells in a stave must all have the same caster level but the rules are silent on other items. However as Sean K. Reynolds would say about people attempting to use loopholes to lower the costs of magic item creation: "it's basically cheating."
What's the conclusion? Don't try to use this as a basis for adding anticipate peril to every armor. The pricing is unique to this one named item.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Before we dig in [...]
Thank you very much for the good and detailed explanation! BR.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Deeper dive: [...]
Hi Belafon,
I tried to understand the cost calculation of some other named items in the meantime.1) Boots of speed (12000gp, CL10)
This is based on the spell haste:
- Wizard: SL3 (SL: spell level), min CL5
- Summoner: SL2, min CL4
Haste has a duration of 1 rd/CL, therefore CL=10.
It is a command activated item. Therefore, assuming a wizard, we get:
3x10x2000gp = 60000gp
1 charge per day:
60000gp/5 = 12000gp
This matches the "official" price.
But it also means, that the same item made by a summoner would cost 8000 gp.
2) Figurine of the dwarven forge (15000gp, CL5)
This one is more complicated, as it needs 3 spell components:
a) Shrink item: SL3 (wizard, min CL5)
b) Heat metal: SL2 (druid, min CL3)
c) Flame blade: SL2 (druid, min CL3)
a) and b) are command activated (without charge restriction!), c) is use-actived with a charge restriction (once per day).
The cost for a) would be:
3x5x1800gp = 27000gp
Obviously this doesn't work out.
Therefore, I assume 1 charge per day for a) and b) too:
27500gp/5 = 5400gp
The cost for b):
2x3x1800gp/5 = 2160gp
Multiple ability of the same kind, second most costly:
2160gp x 0.75 = 1620gp
The cost for c):
2x3x2000gp/5 = 2400 gp
As the duration is only 1 minute (equivalent to CL1), I divide by 3:
2400gp/3 = 800gp
Multiple ability of the same kind, third most costly:
800gp x 0.5 = 400gp
Summing up a) to c) and multiplying by 2 (no space limitation):
(5400gp+1620gp+400gp) x 2 = 14840gp
This is about the "official" price.
What do you think?
BR.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Generally speaking, items are priced on what they actually give rather than what actually goes into them: Items don't become cheaper or more expensive to make for different classes.
For spells with differing spell levels, I believe the guideline has been to use the 'best' version from the 'wizard/cleric/druid' spell lists and only look at additional classes if the spell doesn't appear on any of those lists, so you would always treat Haste as a 3rd level spell for pricing purposes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...For spells with differing spell levels, I believe the guideline has been to use the 'best' version from the 'wizard/cleric/druid' spell lists...
In fact the rules state:
"Calculate the market price based on the lowest possible level caster, no matter who makes the item."BR.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...For spells with differing spell levels, I believe the guideline has been to use the 'best' version from the 'wizard/cleric/druid' spell lists...In fact the rules state:
"Calculate the market price based on the lowest possible level caster, no matter who makes the item."
The whole paragraph is:
Since different classes get access to certain spells at different levels, the prices for two characters to make the same item might actually be different. An item is only worth two times what the caster of the lowest possible level can make it for. Calculate the market price based on the lowest possible level caster, no matter who makes the item.
However there's a couple of caveats that need to be applied to those sentences.
1) That paragraph was written in the CRB and never updated when other books (and other class spell lists) were released.2) In particular the summoner spell list in APG had the wrong levels from publication and was not fixed until Unchained.
You won't find the following in any published book, but if you read enough designer messageboard posts (particularly those of Sean K. Reynolds) and/or were lucky enough to go to any Q&A panels with designers during the 1E period you come to the following conclusions.
0) If the players are using clauses in the item creation rules to lower their price, they are basically cheating.
1) If an item has a published price, that's the market price regardless of who created it. It might be possible that a particular PC can create it at less than half price but that doesn't mean players can buy the item cheaper in a market just because they can come up with a theoretical crafter who could have made it cheaper.
2) The assumption for any "generic" ability/item pricing/etc. where the spell level matters is that you first look to the wizard, cleric, druid, or psychic spell lists. If the spell isn't on any of those lists, then go to the others. (You can find examples in FAQ entries like this one.)
3) The item creation guidelines are just that. Guidelines. Not hard and fast rules. The idea when creating a new magic item is to come up with something roughly equivalent in usefulness and then assign a roughly equivalent price. Not to figure out how to make your item as cheaply as possible.
4) The more unique (not directly analogous to an existing item or spell) your item is, the harder it is to get the price right.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with your points. Regarding your first point:
0) If the players are using clauses in the item creation rules to lower their price, they are basically cheating.
If you are referring to the pricing of named items, I agree.
I assume you did not mean the specifed rules to lower the price of adding a magic feature with respect to:
- Charge restriction (divide by 5/number of charges per day)
- Adding multiple, similar features to an item (factors 0.75 and 0.5)
- Items that require a skill/specific class or alignment to use (10 and 30% reduction respectively)
BR.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with your points. Regarding your first point:
0) If the players are using clauses in the item creation rules to lower their price, they are basically cheating.If you are referring to the pricing of named items, I agree.
I assume you did not mean the specifed rules to lower the price of adding a magic feature with respect to:
- Charge restriction (divide by 5/number of charges per day)
- Adding multiple, similar features to an item (factors 0.75 and 0.5)
- Items that require a skill/specific class or alignment to use (10 and 30% reduction respectively)BR.
Actually, SKR, when he was the developer with the job to reply in the forum, wrote:
So more than likely, the price will be as if the light/esplend worked for everyone despite the fact it doesn't.Correct.
When building an item, you calculate the cost to create it as if it were in the hands of an optimal user. Otherwise it's basically cheating. Observe:
Ezren makes a headband of vast intelligence +6. Cost to create: 18,000 gp
vs.
Ezren makes a headband of vast intelligence +6, but it only works for male humans (discount!) named Ezren (discount!) who are at least "old" age (discount) and were born in Absalom (discount!). Cost to create: ridiculously cheap, even though it works exactly like a standard headband +6.
For the OP's question:
Eagle’s splendor 2*3*1800/5 = 2160
Burning hands SL1 x CL3 x 1800/5 = 1080
Using the "multiple different abilities" guideline, we multiply the cost of the burning hands ability by 1.5 to get 1620
2160 + 1620 = 3,780Glowing with light at will is pretty insignificant--it's not as good as being able to cast light at will (because only the orb lights, rather than being able to cast it on a coin you can throw, an ally's weapon, etc.), so I didn't use the standard SL .5 x CL 3 x 1800 for an on-command unlimited cantrip. Furthermore, the caster level of an unlimited-use light cantrip has a negligible effect (the effect on the duration is irrelevant because it's an at-will ability, and the increased resistance to a dispelling attempt is essentially irrelevant). Plus, the option to light at will is something you get for free in magic weapons, so throwing it in here at something than the formulaic cost is fair. As the mathematical price of the item so far is a non-simple number, I rounded the price up to 3,900 gp (1) to take into account the cost of the light ability, and (2) to make the final gp price nicer.
so he was very much against those discounts.
Plus:Pricing New Items
The correct way to price an item is by comparing its abilities to similar items in the Core Rulebook (see Magic Item Gold Piece Values on page 549 of the Core Rulebook), 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 in the Core Rulebook, the GM should require using the price of the Core Rulebook 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 15–29 on page 550 of Core Rulebook.
Lots of stuff in this thread too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ezren makes a headband of vast intelligence +6. Cost to create: 18,000 gp
vs.
Ezren makes a headband of vast intelligence +6, but it only works for male humans (discount!) named Ezren (discount!) who are at least "old" age (discount) and were born in Absalom (discount!). Cost to create: ridiculously cheap, even though it works exactly like a standard headband +6.
What you describe is a perversion of the third rule given in my post, which will never be allowed by any sensible DM.
What I need are rules/guidelines for the creation of magic items that I can understand and reproduce.
The specified rules for discounts are from my point of view valid, but should be applied sensibly.
As always, the DM has the final word.
BR.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The specified rules for discounts are from my point of view valid, but should be applied sensibly.
As always, the DM has the final word.
The guidelines for item pricing are, in short, GM tools. The "discount" factors allow the GM to design an item at a lower cost than normal. Here are a few possible reasons, often for more than one at the same time:
1) To make a particularly challenging enemy. Giving the evil wizard an item that requires a NE alignment is a way of increasing his power above what NPC wealth would normally suggest.
2) To give the party a lore-rich item, but one that they won't necessarily have a use for (like a weapon that only functions for members of a certain family).
3) To give the enemies a useful item while keeping the party wealth at the desired level. (An item that no one in the party can use and that sells for less than full price.)
4) (rarely) To design an item as loot for a specific party member.
If the GM wants to allow discount factors (even a limit such as only one per item) when the party is crafting, that's her choice. But she needs to be aware that it's going to skew the wealth levels and things won't match up with the power levels that are designed in encounters. It is NOT the expectation that the PCs are able to take advantage of those discounts when crafting. And certainly not when buying in a market.
As Sean says later in the thread Diego quoted:
So then why bother to include these discounts? When would you ever use them, other than perhaps to screw over PC's by including treasure they not only might not be able to use but also can't sell for as much money?That's pretty much the reason--and it's not me being a jerk, it's (insert evil race) being jerks.
And it makes people who max out Use Magic Device happy for their investment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As Sean says later in the thread Diego quoted:[...]
I do not undertand Sean's calculation for the orb of the waybringer.
He says in one post that "body spaces" refers to items you can wear.
An orb cannot be worn, therefore it doesn't occupy a body space. Based on the table "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values", the rule "No space limitation" in the special secion should be applied, i.e. multiply the total costs by 2.
Or am I missing something here?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As Sean says later in the thread Diego quoted:[...]
I do not undertand Sean's calculation for the orb of the waybringer.
He says in one post that "body spaces" refers to items you can wear.
An orb cannot be worn, therefore it doesn't occupy a body space. Based on the table "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values", the rule "No space limitation" in the special secion should be applied, i.e. multiply the total costs by 2.
Or am I missing something here?
Not certain what exactly you are referring to, but I'm guessing the orb needs to be held in order to be used and therefore could be considered to use a 'held item slot' rather than a 'slotless' item like an ioun stone...
Generally speaking, my advice regarding custom magic items is 'Just Walk Away' as they tend to be far more trouble than they are worth...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As Sean says later in the thread Diego quoted:[...]
I do not undertand Sean's calculation for the orb of the waybringer.
He says in one post that "body spaces" refers to items you can wear.
An orb cannot be worn, therefore it doesn't occupy a body space. Based on the table "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values", the rule "No space limitation" in the special secion should be applied, i.e. multiply the total costs by 2.
Or am I missing something here?
Orb of the Waybringer is a neck slot item, thus the 1.5 x multiplier.
That thread is a very good example of how item design can be more art than math. Sean says "Here's the math for the burning hands and eagle's splendor parts of the item (3,780 gp). I consider the light ability insignificant, and here's why, so I just made the total item price a round number that is a bit higher."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Orb of the Waybringer[/url] is a neck slot item, thus the 1.5 x multiplier.
Yes that's it, thanks again.