Wondrous item creation rule?


Rules Questions


so: Use activated or continuous= spell lvlx caster level x 2000gold

True strike: lvl1 cl 1 = 2000 gold

Weapon= cost of masterwork item...300g plus sword cost= 325g

total gold for a magical Sword of True strike=2,325 gold

is this correct?

Effect allows a continuous +20 to attack.


Short answer, no.
Next problem: continous use items are intended to use spells with measured durations (see note 2 on that table)
Next: the table is intended to be consulted -after- comparing cost with comparable items.
Lastly: no, the cost for that effect is stupidly broken.

Dark Archive

Weapon of truestrike is one of the actual examples of what not to allow.

Quote:


Example: Rob’s cleric wants to create a heavy mace with a continuous true strike ability, granting its wielder a +20 insight bonus on attack rolls. The formula for a continuous spell effect is spell level × caster level × 2,000 gp, for a total of 2,000 gp (spell level 1, caster level 1). Jessica, the GM, points out that a +5 enhancement bonus on a weapon costs 50,000 gp, and the +20 bonus from true strike is much better than the +5 bonus from standard weapon enhancement, and suggests a price of 200,000 gp for the mace. Rob agrees that using the formula in this way is unreasonable and decides to craft a +1 heavy mace using the standard weapon pricing rules instead.
Quote:

The Exchange

In the same sense that you should never put a handgun in the hands of a 5 year old child, I say "you shouldn't put a true strike item in your game." Yes, if you know your 5yo very well and know he or she can handle it responsibly, that's up to you, but rather than adding that caveat every single time this comes up (and I've addressed it many, many times), it's easier and simpler to say "don't do it, it's dangerous."

Then why, in the 11-year history of D&D 3E and Pathfinder, has a reasonable multi-use not-spell-trigger-or-limited-charges true strike item never appeared in an official Wizards or Paizo product?

Because the designers realize that giving combat-oriented characters routine and easy access to a +20 attack bonus is a big, big problem, and pricing an unlimited-use version of that spell pushes well beyond the 200,000 gp maximum value for most wondrous items.

That said, do what you want in your campaign.


No, no, no. That is something you should not allow or do. This kind of thinking should be nipped in the bud. A weapon with a continuous true strike effect (+20 insight) would be far far better than most magical weapons. Maybe even a few artifacts.

I would price that ability as an 800,000 gp effect. Bonus * bonus * 2000 gp minimum. I might raise the base rate to 2500 gp since insight an uncommon bonus type.

A magic sword needs to have a +1 bonus minimum. The min cost before you can add other abilities is in this case 2325 gp. 2000 gp for a +1 bonus, 300 gp for masterwork quality, and 25 gp for the sword.

Minor question, what sword is this anyways? You only gave the price.

Take the dagger of venom as an example: Before it gets its poison effect, it must be at least a +1 dagger, so it would cost 2302 gp. Poison is a 3rd level druid spell, so 3 * 5 * 2000 gp = 30,000 gp. Make it usable once per day will reduce it by a factor of 5, to 6000 gp. In total, the dagger of venom is worth 8302 gp.


LoL...

Liberty's Edge

And most of the prices above don't even take into account that True strike includes:

Quote:
Additionally, you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to attackers trying to strike a concealed target.

Hearthseeking that does that on a large but limited number of targets is a +1, with the ability to work on an unlimited number of targets it becomes at least a +2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@ TheApapalypse I have to congratulate you for coming up with the single most abusive idea I have ever seen.

There are a couple of things you are not considering. Craft Wondrous items does not allow you to create magic weapons. That requires Craft Magic Weapons and Armor.

The spell gives you a +20 bonus on your next attack if it is made before the next round. That makes the duration of the spell till the end of your next round. Making the spell a continuous effect would extend that duration and allow you to gain the +20 bonus on your next attack no matter when it was. It would not apply to any other attacks beyond that. So, if it is a continuous effect, you only get the +20 bonus on the first attack after the item was created, after that it no longer functions. If you make it a use activated it could be used multiple times, but the duration would not be extended. Activating a special ability on a weapon is a standard action. Since making an attack is also a standard action this would prevent you from attack in the same round you activated it. So, if it is a use activated item you can get the bonus once every two rounds, and only on the first attack after you activate it. That is still abusive, but not quite as bad.

No sane GM is going to allow it to work as either a continuous or use activated item.

I could see allowing it to work with a limited number of charges per day. But I would increase the cost by *4 as if it were a continuous use items, but still requiring to spend a standard action to activate it. So, for 1,600 GP you would be able to use true strike once per day. But in order to do so the weapon would have to be enchanted with at least a +1 bonus. That would work out to be 3,900 + the cost of the weapon for a +1 sword that would allow you to use true strike once per day.


now that most of the criticism has been posted you are just doing what most people do without realizing that;
1) the rules can be guidelines rather than formula and there are a lot of addendums/side rules. Not all of the side rules or corrections are obvious and the cross indexing is generally non-existent.
2) it takes some experience with the "black magic" of creating what people think is a balanced magic item.
3) Game Balance is "a thing". It has to be difficult enough that players think it is a challenge and that they tried hard but not too easy or too simple.
4) If you only design things that are easily compared, you are likely designing nothing new.

so making a couple of failures is okay. Nobody is going to pay you $1 one way or the other. RAW is complex especially when it comes to magic. Every Professional Designer (I got paid to write this) has their "Fabulous Failure" or two... lol...

You did see where you didn't read the section thoroughly and found out there are cost multipliers. Yes - those pesky side rules.

Next what you did was explicitly called out as unbalanced. So read the whole section. Try it, then ask your GM or a buddy what he thinks (do a sanity check of your work).

Lastly, do what the book says and compare it to what there is. REALIZE that there are underpowered items, close to on target items, and some overpowered items. The underpowered dregs don't get called out as people mostly think they're obvious and tend to ignore them and feel they are a plague upon the less clever. Many of the overpowered or hard to manage items and patently Evil items got banned by PFS(aka Organized Play) so Archives of Nethys(AoN) is a Real Help with their PFS logos. A few were Public Relations problems and got banned as it was the easy fix after complaints were made.

#1 A good item to research is a set of "Survivor's Bracers" that have 3 charges per day of Mage Armor that last 8hrs each and 2 charges of Cure Light Wounds all on command that affect the wearer and are only usable by wizards. Yes, Bracers of Armor are the comparable and the book states that they Are Intentionally Overpriced. There are differences between the two items besides price and it takes some experience to go beyond the obvious. The key is to look at how would you bring the Survivor's Bracers into a reasonable Game Balance.

#2 a Wand of True Strike 1@1 [50] {so that's a First level spell at(@) caster level 1 with 50 charges} 750gp is considered reasonable and game balanced. It works with ANY weapon the caster has. Ask yourself why? What's the differences. Why is that balanced when a weapon with that spell is not? How many things can a creature do over 5 rounds and what is Action Economy...


Just for everyones info....This was a question a player at my table asked, they thought they had a loophole and I wanted outside sources to say what I have said so that it wasnt taken as me just "ignoring a players great idea"....though I did allow either for the price range of 200k (gold isnt that easy to come by in our game) or it being an Artifact he could quest for.
....You all did well and thank you.


Tbh, I wouldn't allow this even for an obscene amount of gold. A weapon with a continuous True Strike is game-breaking.


In the ToEE there is a sword that always strikes last in the round but never misses.

If I were to allow such a weapon I would treat it as an AD&D 1e artifact (not non epic PC creatable) and include several drawbacks, such as not allowing the wielder (or possessor) to retreat from any enemy or to only strike opponents who have attacked (or more severely, wounded) the wielder.

Liberty's Edge

Ryze Kuja wrote:
Tbh, I wouldn't allow this even for an obscene amount of gold. A weapon with a continuous True Strike is game-breaking.

I agree. A use activate version is absurd.

The only vaguely acceptable version is one where you have a standard activation ability, i.e. round one you activate True strike, the next round you benefit from True strike on the first attack. Hit or miss, the effect ends.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Wondrous item creation rule? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.