Please make the Item DC scaling already

[Christopher#2411504]

Items with a fixed DC are just bad. They barely work on the levels we first get them. And 2-4 levels later the DC becomes too low to even bother wasting actions, worn usage and property rune slots on it. Any item with a DC is pretty much a "automatic skip" or "we never found a opportunity, so we sold it later" for each of my groups.

This needs fixing so badly, you partially did fix it - but only for some classes and some items. But I think something more general is needed. Too many things aren't worth considering like this.

I don't think Alchemists would complain too much if everyone got to use their Class DC. This is a mandatory buff, not a exiting one. A class Feature Tax. I am playing one and I would not complain.

But if you don't want to use the class DC for any reason, maybe take a page out of the Innate Spells?
"When you gain an innate spell, you become trained in the spell attack modifier and spell DC statistics. At 12th level, these proficiencies increase to expert. Unless noted otherwise, Charisma is your spellcasting attribute modifier for innate spells."
Having a separate "Item DC" Proficiency scaling like that could work. The attribute should probably be the classes Key attribute. It would be better for casters, but worse for Martials - unless they have a override to use Class DC like the Alchemist.

[Trip.H]

Hard agree*. Especially for Invested items, that DC scaling could/should be baked into the concept of connecting your soul to the item. They've even got a lore explanation for it right there!

.

Alchemist sidebar:

It might have been a throwaway point, but I actually would complain about the *as is* state of Alch if its archetype got scaling DCs for free.

Mostly because if that happened, there would really be no reason (for a non-Fumbus Bomber) to ever play the class again, lol. Right now, the feat tax of getting both 9+ daily items and scaling DCs is a PC-changing number of feats to spend. Lower that feat cost just a bit more, and you'll have a whole lot more PCs that can justify the INT cost carrying an alch toolkit in their bag.

It is still just buck wild that the remaster removed the lagging item level that was baked into the alch archetype.

It is like letting archetype spellcasters get top R spell slots. For the moment, the lack of scaling DC at least means that they would be limited in item selection. With both, the alch archetype would mean classes with faster DC progression would be more potent alchemists than alchemists, lol.

(Yes, this is already true with feat spend. Alchemists never become Legendary in Alchemy, in a system where a Kin/Alch can make alch items of legendary potency.)

.

But, Alchemist being nearly FUBAR after the remaster (as a pick for main class) is not a reason to keep such a needed system change from happening.

I think that for Invested items, there's just no good argument nor balance worry against getting scaling DCs.

It is nearly criminal that all pf2 newbies go through the whole "cycle" of hype --> grief --> anger, etc when first discovering their first super neat magic (static DC) item.

For us, it was a Ring of the Ram. Our first pf2 adventure, we thought it would become an evergreen tool for our Champion in the abomination vaults, and as the DC lagged, and we learned about that one little detail, it completely reversed the hype and made it retroactively aggravating.
Made us feel like noob chumps, as no one noticed the DC had been behind for a while.

Made it *really* suck for that player, as they then had to evaluate what had become a personal treasure, and understand that it was mechanically a handicap to keep wearing/investing in it each day.

That "magic item hype cycle" is kinda a universal pf2 experience, and it's a real crappy one that doesn't need to happen.

.

I am just a bit slower to blanket say DCs should scale across all consumables though, as that might genuinely break some things.

Consumable balance is actually kinda all over the place / poorly done (over powered*).
There are likely a lot of low gp consumables that would out-compete class actions if they had scaling DCs.

First that comes to mind is Black Tendril Shot, but I've not really examined the consumables from that specific angle though.

[Ascalaphus]

I think the design intent is to make sure you eventually move on to new items as the old ones fade. That way, you'll actually care about new treasure, instead of going "yeah but all my investment slots are already taken".

Telling people to like it doesn't mean they end up liking it though.

I would really like a solid formula for "how much gold do I need to pay to upgrade this item's DC to the DC appropriate for my current level?"

[yellowpete]

That is one intention, another is to make item power level scale more closely in alignment with cost (i.e., exponentially rather than linearly) so that it doesn't become optimal to spend your high level paycheck on the myriad of low level items you can afford with it, with each of them only being marginally weaker than the single on-level item you could have gotten instead.

Though they kind of didn't prevent that anyways because scrolls and wands exist. Frankly I don't think you're breaking much by making invested items scale automatically because that investiture limit will be hit quickly, at which point on-level items will still be an upgrade worth striving for. Wouldn't recommend it for consumables though unless you want to see your martials periodically stocking up on dozens of doses of clown monarch and similar stuff.

[moosher12]

I had a player pick the Poisoner archetype, then within about two months, ask me to switch the archetype because they felt their poisons almost never worked.

[exequiel759]

I totally agree with OP. I feel Starfinder finally made class DCs matter with area attacks and other stuff that use it because in Pathfinder unless you are a kineticist, commander, or use a weapon in the brawling, firearm, flail, or hammer group you barely remember you have a class DC at all. I don't know how many PF2e characters I made but I don't remember more than a few times that I made the GM roll against my class DC or vice versa.

[Deriven Firelion]

Yeah. We barely remember to make item saves due to lack of scaling. We don't care about item special effects due to lack of scaling. Lack of scaling makes items pretty lame past enemies close to the item level.

[magnuskn]

I'm still quite new to GM'ing PF2E, but this has bothered me as well. I don't know if I want to houserule this for my first campaign. The thing is, even if DC's scale, the effects should not. So if an item has several upgrade stages (like many of them do), the player should still be incentivized to get the upgrade, because he'll get a better effect out of it. Or maybe replace the item with another one which just has a better effect altogether.

[Mangaholic13]

magnuskn wrote:

I'm still quite new to GM'ing PF2E, but this has bothered me as well. I don't know if I want to houserule this for my first campaign. The thing is, even if DC's scale, the effects should not. So if an item has several upgrade stages (like many of them do), the player should still be incentivized to get the upgrade, because he'll get a better effect out of it. Or maybe replace the item with another one which just has a better effect altogether.

Yeah, that does sound like a good compromise: Have the item's DC scale (or use Class DC when higher), but keep the effect at the same level. Then the thing can still have a use without making players go, "This is nice... but I already have that" to new gear.

[Lightning Raven]

Ascalaphus wrote:

I think the design intent is to make sure you eventually move on to new items as the old ones fade. That way, you'll actually care about new treasure, instead of going "yeah but all my investment slots are already taken".

Telling people to like it doesn't mean they end up liking it though.

I would really like a solid formula for "how much gold do I need to pay to upgrade this item's DC to the DC appropriate for my current level?"

I fully understand the design intent, but in practice, you do want those upgraded items anyways, because they do get much better. The issue is the in-between levels and when the item "line" stops at earlier levels.

In my opinion, DC of higher level items is important, BUT, the effects of higher level items already justify themselves without the DC increase. Lots of items go from 1/day to 1/hour or offer improved versions of their effects, which makes them still competitive, even if the increased DC is not relevant.

[Finoan]

There are three stats for an item that are based on level: effect DC, effect power (damage dealt, healing given, etc), and cost.

You can't change just one of them and then still claim that the item is balanced.

You can change all three at the same time and to the same new level and continue to have a balanced item that is now higher level and still relevant for higher level gameplay. To do that, use the tables for building items.

[exequiel759]

I think the best solution here is to change how item DCs scale. For example, the average magic item DC for a 5th level item is 19 (Table: Magic Item DCs). A 5th level PC that is trained in their class DC most likely has a DC of 21. Rather than use your class DC (which seems to be higher in average than the expected DC for magic items) or a DC set by the item, what if items instead had a base DC that adds your level?

For example, a pummeling snare requires DC 21 basic Reflex save. Why couldn't this be replaced with something like "DC 14 + your level"? The DC would start slower than in its current version (DC 19 since its a 5th level item), but it would remain useful for your whole career. If there was a greater pummeling snare, the DC could instead be "DC 18 + your level" so both its effect and DC would be stronger. I'm pretty sure someone that knew math better than me could easily make a macro taking all the items and translate them into a sistem like this that would be balanced. This wouldn't require new mechanics or new text, just change the DCs.

[Christopher#2411504]

exequiel759 wrote:

I think the best solution here is to change how item DCs scale. For example, the average magic item DC for a 5th level item is 19 (Table: Magic Item DCs). A 5th level PC that is trained in their class DC most likely has a DC of 21. Rather than use your class DC (which seems to be higher in average than the expected DC for magic items) or a DC set by the item, what if items instead had a base DC that adds your level?

That is partially why I suggested a "Item DC" stat. Something neither Spellcasting Proficiency nor Class DC. So the messiness of wildly varriying Class DC doesn't factor into this.

It could even be something like "Level based DC -2".

[exequiel759]

Christopher#2411504 wrote:

exequiel759 wrote:

I think the best solution here is to change how item DCs scale. For example, the average magic item DC for a 5th level item is 19 (Table: Magic Item DCs). A 5th level PC that is trained in their class DC most likely has a DC of 21. Rather than use your class DC (which seems to be higher in average than the expected DC for magic items) or a DC set by the item, what if items instead had a base DC that adds your level?

That is partially why I suggested a "Item DC" stat. Something neither Spellcasting Proficiency nor Class DC. So the messiness of wildly varriying Class DC doesn't factor into this.

It could even be something like "Level based DC -2".

The thing with an item DC stat is that it requires going into every class and adding an item DC class feature and its improvements to go expert/master/whatever and that wouldn't take into account certain items having higher DCs for their level and such. Changing DCs from "DC 19" to "DC 15 + your level" is easier because its as simple as throwing every item with a DC into an excel sheet and take away the difference between their DC and the average DC for magic items of their level, then replace the magic items DC table with something that takes into account your level for the math and finally modify each item appropiately applying the difference.

It would certainly be tiresome to scout each magic item with a DC, throw them into an excel sheet, and come up with a balanced replacement on how to calculate the DCs, but once you have that the work its pretty much done. For example, a lesser blister ammunition has a DC 19, while a clown monarch poison has a DC 22. Both are 5th level items, but the clown monarch poison has a DC 3 higher than the average for its level. This means that, in the whatever math formula replaces the current one to calculate magic item DCs, the clown monarch poison should have a DC 3 higher than a lesser blister ammunition. Now apply this to each magic item with a DC.

[moosher12]

Can always do what some archetypes do, which is use "Class DC or Spellcasting DC, whichever is higher"

[MadamReshi]

IMO the best option is to simply houserule things to allow items to be upgraded by crafters, using similar rules to Crafting, adjusting gold costs and time (depending on rarity).

That way, there is a way to keep certain items the party wants, but it requires investment - so new items have a way to shine too.

[Ascalaphus]

MadamReshi wrote:

IMO the best option is to simply houserule things to allow items to be upgraded by crafters, using similar rules to Crafting, adjusting gold costs and time (depending on rarity).

That way, there is a way to keep certain items the party wants, but it requires investment - so new items have a way to shine too.

Yeah, something along the lines of "if you upgrade an item by X levels, the DC goes up by Y, at a cost of Z". And if you upgrade an item the level of the next "official" version of the item (if any) then it becomes that.

Calculating X and Y is fairly straightforward, with some study of DC tables. Figuring out how to calculate Z would take some more research but it should be doable too.

[Christopher#2411504]

exequiel759 wrote:

The thing with an item DC stat is that it requires going into every class and adding an item DC class feature and its improvements to go expert/master/whatever and that wouldn't take into account certain items having higher DCs for their level and such.

Since it would intentionally be the same progression, you write it once in the item rules. Done.

Please don't invent fake problems.

[exequiel759]

Christopher#2411504 wrote:

exequiel759 wrote:

The thing with an item DC stat is that it requires going into every class and adding an item DC class feature and its improvements to go expert/master/whatever and that wouldn't take into account certain items having higher DCs for their level and such.

Since it would intentionally be the same progression, you write it once in the item rules. Done.

Please don't invent fake problems.

No? I'm literally showing you its not the same progression lol.

[Castilliano]

If it's tied to class or spell proficiency it's not the same progression, but if tied to a flat DC + level then it is. (And the latter's pretty easy to extrapolate from earlier items; subtract the item's level from its DC then add the user's level back in.)

Another aspect of a flat DC + level is it will fall behind the curve (as maybe it should for a lower-level item). The DC will go up only 1 per level when the normal DC curve is slightly higher. So some pressure remains to upgrade one's items, but not an "upgrade or sell" level of pressure (on an item one's PC might cherish).

In my first 3.0 game a powergamer with only secondary interest in RPing was truly bummed out that he couldn't upgrade his original sword to be the one he carried throughout his career. Which is to say, such seemingly minor things like item continuity can matter. (And yes I tweaked the rules so he could pay to upgrade it to masterwork so it could become magical.)

[WatersLethe]

I would like to point out that "upgrading to level appropriate DC at an appropriate gold cost" has it's own issues. It's a bunch of annoying book keeping just to make items not suck, doesn't help in low down time situations, and still frequently results in unsatisfying stories. It makes loot sheets not only a list of expiry dates, it also asks you to reup your subscription to keep using them.

I recommend the [New DC] = [Old DC] + [Char Level - Item Level].

Then warn players not to try to cheese old low cost items.

[BotBrain]

To an extent I actually like non-scaling items because they encoruage players to actually use them. It has its own problems, but I do like the fact that my players can't just sit on 100 items until the perfect time to use them.

[SpontaneousLightning]

I also really don't like non-scaling items. If I am a player I always never end up using any item activation because they never feel worth the actions it takes to use them when I get the item, let alone a few levels later. When I am a GM, I never see players use items either, unless they are consumables like healing potions.

I think a good thing to introduce to your games are relics. These are special items that grow stronger with your character, and they unlock new abilities as you level up. For example, you could have an axe that is an earth/plant relic that starts with the ability to spray pollen at level 1, and then at level 5 gains the shattered earth ability, letting you create difficult terrain.

[Teridax]

I suspect not wanting players to hoard consumables was one of the reasons why item DCs were implemented in this way as well. I also think the designers wanted items to have power proportionate to their level, and for some items that’s reflected in their DC. It’s not great, as it makes items lose effectiveness over time, but it at least accomplishes that function.

Personally I’ve used homebrew runes to up the DC of items at a modest price and that’s worked out well, though there are likely other ways to go about this: permanent items with DCs could probably use your class DC instead, or the higher of your class and spell DC, since swapping out to a permanent item for an effect with a DC on top of needing to invest it is likely to be too cumbersome to be abusable. Consumables may need a different approach to prevent stacking though: one way to do this could be to have an item that lets you treat consumables as permanent items, investing each one, raising its DC to match your level, and letting you recharge the consumable after a duration so it can be reused.

[Tridus]

Ascalaphus wrote:

I think the design intent is to make sure you eventually move on to new items as the old ones fade. That way, you'll actually care about new treasure, instead of going "yeah but all my investment slots are already taken".

Telling people to like it doesn't mean they end up liking it though.

I would really like a solid formula for "how much gold do I need to pay to upgrade this item's DC to the DC appropriate for my current level?"

Exactly. Like, the result of this decision is that most item activations feel useless a level or two after you get them. Upgraded versions are so far apart that it's not like you can go upgrade it for it to keep up. Like how alchemy and reinforcing shield runes have enough tiers that the gaps are reduced.

At this point at my table, players honestly barely look at items like this. They found it has an offensive activiation with a DC and then just sell it. Utility items and ones that don't become obsolete so quickly are much more popular.

Thaumaturge at least has Intensify Investiture to help with this. An easier fix is to add more feats like that proobably, since at least then players have a way to do something about it if they want to be able to use items more. (It would be quite a good General Feat.)

[Ascalaphus]

I think there's a noticeable gap between how (some) players like to do their items, and what game designers think you should be doing. Note that I said "some" because it's possible that there are plenty of players that aren't so bothered. But I've seen plenty that are bothered. There's some common threads:

- People value permanent items much higher than consumables
- People like item continuity, instead of trading for a new thing

This was really noticeable in Starfinder 1 where you had to switch armors and weapons every 2-3 levels to stay numerically up to date, but the higher version of the particular weapon or armor you liked might not be available until 5 levels later.

I think to some degree the aversion to consumables isn't really rational; if you think about it, any permanent item that doesn't level up with you is also a bit like a consumable.

Although I also think that consumables aren't quite priced right in terms of purchase cost, sale value, action cost, and effect. A healing potion that costs a noticeable percentage of your wealth and takes an action to draw and an action to drink and you might need to spend actions regripping weapons, and then could end up healing only 1HP - why would you buy that? Even if you found it, would you use it? Or does it make more sense to sell for half price?

Note that SF1 let you sell stuff back only for 1/10th the sale price. I think for consumables definitely the sell-back-price compared to utility ratio leans far toward selling back.

A lot of the new talismans are a happy change in that regard. They're things that make sense buying a few of and restocking occasionally. I think that's the price point to aim for: that consumables are something that you'd buy some of, but not so good that you'd spend all of your money on consumables and not care about permanent items at all. But right now there's only few consumables (mainly talismans and lifesaver utility scrolls) that I'd consider buying.

Coming back to item DCs: I think scaling the DC on those should come with a monetary cost, but that pricing formula should be available. If there's a kind of consumable that helps you make a nice character build, that should continue to be viable across more character levels.

[Ravingdork]

Ascalaphus wrote:

I think the design intent is to make sure you eventually move on to new items as the old ones fade. That way, you'll actually care about new treasure, instead of going "yeah but all my investment slots are already taken".

Instead of the Christmas Tree characters we had in 1e, now we have yard sellers in 2e. ;P

[Easl]

Tridus wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

I think the design intent is to make sure you eventually move on to new items as the old ones fade. That way, you'll actually care about new treasure, instead of going "yeah but all my investment slots are already taken".

Telling people to like it doesn't mean they end up liking it though.

I would really like a solid formula for "how much gold do I need to pay to upgrade this item's DC to the DC appropriate for my current level?"

Exactly. Like, the result of this decision is that most item activations feel useless a level or two after you get them. Upgraded versions are so far apart that it's not like you can go upgrade it for it to keep up. Like how alchemy and reinforcing shield runes have enough tiers that the gaps are reduced.

At this point at my table, players honestly barely look at items like this. They found it has an offensive activiation with a DC and then just sell it. Utility items and ones that don't become obsolete so quickly are much more popular.

I'm in agreement with you both. A more fine-grained method of upgrading such equipment (L+1 does this and costs that) would make it more of a player choice whether to ditch it for the next shiny object or stick with it because you like it.

Just considering the Ring of the Ram example, regular to greater is a gap of 7 levels and in that time the DC goes up 10, the damage +1d6, and the cost 2,480. It would be pretty doable with a simple table to list 'crafting upgrades' for levels 7-12.

[steelhead]

SpontaneousLightning wrote:

I also really don't like non-scaling items. I think a good thing to introduce to your games are relics. These are special items that grow stronger with your character, and they unlock new abilities as you level up. For example, you could have an axe that is an earth/plant relic that starts with the ability to spray pollen at level 1, and then at level 5 gains the shattered earth ability, letting you create difficult terrain.

I am also a big fan of relic items. They give more variety as the item doesn’t have to be a weapon or armor, and can start as almost any type of permanent magic item. The problem I’ve found is there hasn’t been any continued support for them such as expanded gifts or even relic categories. I’m currently trying to home brew something that does not overlap with the shadow gift and some others, but it’s not easy.

That being said, epic items still don’t fix the problem of the huge amount of non-scaling items. If DCs for at least some of the cooler items scaled, then there wouldn’t be as much brow-beating about PCs being unable to find markets at their level. Particularly, the middle to upper level characters in certain APs can have difficulty selling items they will never use because of either a lack of interest or very short shelf life of how useful the items can be without a scaling DC.

[Loreguard]

It might be mitigated in part by having set number of your 10 investments which would allow you to boost the DC of effects by the difference between the item level and your level. So Investing the item with the 'premium' investment slot would allow a 10th level character investing a 4th level item to boost its DC by +4.

There are a variety of ways you could set the number. It could be based on a fraction of your level (min 1), or could be 1 + your CHA modifier. By setting the number low enough it forces you to make choices, you make it a viable limitation and encourage people to pay for leveled up items when such a version is available. By having it affect the DC, but not the damage, etc. it leaves value to investing your wealth in available upgrade. I'd also suggest incorporating official means or offering official upgrades for some items that might only have one version now, if implementing something like this.

As an example the Ring of the Ram, there are reasons to want to 'upgrade' your ring to the higher levels, but in the in-between levels, it might be enough to enable an option to boost the DC for the in-between levels.

You could potentially even allow the option to 'invest' consumables with these slots to provide a means to upgrade the consumable's DC like this. This would be potentially expensive to spend a premium investment slot to get the higher DC for a one-time use item, but might also be worth it in some cases.

This avoids the situation where an item might have a DC based on how effective the item is. (relatively High DC for an effect that isn't too impactful, but useful enough to use in certain circumstances) or might have relatively Low DC for a particular Level because the impact of the effect is rather 'strong'. If you have it always jump to some Class DC, that might be bigger jump than would be really balanced.

[Ascalaphus]

So suppose you do what most of us seem to want to do, and provide players with a mechanism to upgrade the items they already have, instead of constantly trading in for new shinies.

Now you run into some new loot. Previously, the job of that new loot would be to replace your no-longer-relevant-DC loot with something new and fresh. But you're committed to keeping your old stuff and upgrading it.

Does this cause problems for keeping loot interesting later in the game? If your investment slots are kinda maxed out and you're mostly just "polishing" the stuff you already have to higher level versions; do you look at all look through a "what can I sell that for" lens? (Or were you always doing that anyway?)

Basically, do we make it hard to give cool rewards later in the game by doing this?

[exequiel759]

I feel people losing interest in loot is thing that happens already. In the few high level campaigns I been both as a player and as a GM I seen people caring less and less about loot the higher the level because you likely had your basics covered for a few levels at that point (plus you also grew attached to the items you have as part of your character's identity), and since nobody really bothers with magic items with DCs unless they are consumables, when you get a magic item with a DC the most likely outcome is going into the "sell next time I'm in town" bin.

Even with consumables I feel most of the time they are getting sold too because outside of elixirs of life, scrolls, and the like you know you are likely not going to use them or remember you have them in the first place, so its pretty much stuff you know its going to turn into money sooner or later.

[Teridax]

Looking across games, I think generally the more satisfying ways of getting players to try out new loot is to have that new loot be easy to try out and worthwhile. Although making older loot irrelevant can be effective at getting players to move on, it generally tends to not be perceived very positively.

Personally, I think there's a way to thread that needle, and it's by offering players ways to keep older loot relevant in ways that don't force commitment. In other words: you should be able to hold onto your old loot if you want, but that shouldn't get in the way of trying new loot, and the moment you decide to replace the old loot, you should be able to do so at no significant cost or effort, nor without incurring any significant sunk cost. In the homebrew section, I cooked up a magic item for keeping old consumables relevant (and refillable!), and one of the basic principles is that the moment you want to try a new consumable instead, you can just swap it out from one day to the next, and the permanent item continues to serve its purpose.

[YuriP]

IMO worse problem with items DC don't progress is that there are many interesting items that simply doesn't have a better version.

So no matter if you found an interesting item with an interesting effect that requires a save or an attack roll, but if there's no better version of this item in higher levels you will drop it soon or simply won't buy it at all.

This is something that was very common to most specific shields in the past where they don't improved their stats, and that was fixed by reinforcing runes in the remaster.

Probably an easy band-aid that doesn't require a large change in the system is to make some kind of runes that could be added to items to improve their DC like reinforcing runes done to fix the lack of progression of specific shields.

The impossible book due the addition of runesmith could be a good place to introduce such kind of thing.

[Porridge]

WatersLethe wrote:

I would like to point out that "upgrading to level appropriate DC at an appropriate gold cost" has it's own issues. It's a bunch of annoying book keeping just to make items not suck, doesn't help in low down time situations, and still frequently results in unsatisfying stories. It makes loot sheets not only a list of expiry dates, it also asks you to reup your subscription to keep using them.

I recommend the [New DC] = [Old DC] + [Char Level - Item Level].

Then warn players not to try to cheese old low cost items.

That's a really elegant approach! One uniform rule that doesn't introduce class disparities and is easy to calculate. Also easy to describe to players; basically: "if your level is higher than the item's, then add the difference to the item DCs".

And if restricted to invested items, it removes worries about cheesing low cost consumables. (Maybe a smart idea anyway, since the developers restrict the Thaumaturge feat "Intensify Investiture" in a similar way.)

Nice! I might actually adopt this houserule.

[Pronate11]

I feel like you could just put a "item DC by level" chart in the book with prices to upgrade and by done with it. I don't think anything is really lost when all lvl 8 items now have the same DCs.

[Ravingdork]

I much prefer the "use your Class DC" approach.

[exequiel759]

I mean, we have a list of item magic prices by level, and we have a list of magic item DCs by level too, so I guess we probably could upgrade the DC by paying the difference of the price of the item and the average price of the item's new level. The new DC would be the recommended DC for the the item's new level. This would be really expensive, but I guess if you like an item enough to care you can upgrade its DC with this method.

[graystone]

Ravingdork wrote:

I much prefer the "use your Class DC" approach.

This would make Kineticists and Commanders disproportionately better at using items than others for no logical sense as nothing in their kit suggests improved magic item use.

[kadance]

What about tying the item to a skill (craft for alchemical, magic tradition for magic items) and giving the character's proficiency bonus to the item DC when they use it?

[Errenor]

kadance wrote:

What about tying the item to a skill (craft for alchemical, magic tradition for magic items) and giving the character's proficiency bonus to the item DC when they use it?

Why go for the involved and complex ways when the easiest and the most fair way already was stated:

[New DC] = [Old DC - Item Level] + [Char Level]
?
(I regrouped components and now the first brackets is a simple fixed number).
____
I'm not sure that the designers' intention of switching for better equipment is that bad. But I agree that items don't make you feel good about them a lot of the time.
Maybe this thing about DCs is just mostly about perception though? So what if a DC is a couple points less than possible (not talking about very outdated items, just mostly on level)? Though maybe this could be fixed if normal items DCs in the table were actually higner that PCs' DCs for the level or at least equal. Now they are about 2 points less (19 instead of 21 at 5th level or 27 instead of 29 at 10th level). I don't think that casters would be very unhappy that an on-level one per day item wasn't worse than their effects in DC.

[Christopher#2411504]

Ravingdork wrote:

I much prefer the "use your Class DC" approach.

That just makes some classes with better Class DC leagues better with items. That especially penalizes casters, who might not even have a Class DC yet. At the same time, having high Class DC classes in the math could mess it up.

We are talking about hte difference between "barely Trained" and "master" here, a gulf of 4 points. And some classes do go Legendary.

Those are reasons why a separate Item DC scaling independant of class would be better. It also has the upside that the few cases when a class does have a "scale to Class DC" feature, that one stays effective.

[Ravingdork]

I'd be fine with an distinct Item DC, especially if it got incorporated well with all the classes. It just seems unnecessarily complex to me.

[Easl]

Ravingdork wrote:

I'd be fine with an distinct Item DC, especially if it got incorporated well with all the classes. It just seems unnecessarily complex to me.

You could tie it to level + a bonus, or level + a skill proficiency. That minimizes the bookkeeping and isn't as varied across classes as class DC.

But that still runs into the problems of hoarding consumables, and making low level items actually better than higher level equivalents (because far lower cost, for the same DC).

So I think higher DCs should probably cost something, not just be automatic. The question is how to make the progression smooth, balanced against opponents, and how to keep new higher level items cool and interesting and worth spending on...while simultaneously creating a decent use case for a character to maintain that favorite item they picked up a few levels back, if they want to do that instead. Maybe make the cost of progressing an item slightly higher than the value of an "on level" one. So the new doodad is always a comparatively good purchase, but upgrading the old one will do when you can't buy or craft anything you like.

[Christopher#2411504]

Easl wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I'd be fine with an distinct Item DC, especially if it got incorporated well with all the classes. It just seems unnecessarily complex to me.

You could tie it to level + a bonus, or level + a skill proficiency. That minimizes the bookkeeping and isn't as varied across classes as class DC.

But that still runs into the problems of hoarding consumables, and making low level items actually better than higher level equivalents (because far lower cost, for the same DC).

Higher level Items also have way more effects behind those savess.

I don't know a lot of items that scale only the DC on higher levels. They always add more duration, higher maximum effects.

And a scaling Item DC could easily be aimed to be slightly lower then the next higher items anyway. Set Item DC to "Level based DC-2" and it would still be somewhat usable.

[Madhippy3]

If the item DCs scale automatically how will the magic vender upsell us the next expensive version :D

[Christopher#2411504]

Madhippy3 wrote:

If the item DCs scale automatically how will the magic vender upsell us the next expensive version :D

All the increases other the DC:

- more conditions
- longer lasting conditions
- higher damage numbers

Plus maybe a scaling 1-2 points worse then the next version.

[ottdmk]

What seems pretty clear to me is that moving away from the static DC would require a massive readjustment of everything. I'm not sure if that's a practical option outside of an Edition change.

[exequiel759]

ottdmk wrote:

What seems pretty clear to me is that moving away from the static DC would require a massive readjustment of everything. I'm not sure if that's a practical option outside of an Edition change.

I think everybody here knows this won't happen. If it could have happened it would been on the Remaster, but right now its practically impossible for Paizo to change such a fundamental part of the system. With that said, it really wouldn't require a massive readjustment of everything and it could probably be introduced as an optional rule in a future book. An item's DC is part of its power budget, and its really easy to compare an item's DC with the recommended item's DC table to see if its higher or lower than normal. If Paizo were to come up a new formula to calculate item DCs using your level, it would be as simple as "follow X formula to determine the new item's DC. If the item has a higher or lower DC than DC listed in the Item DCs by level table, apply the difference". This would keep lower level items with a lower DC even at higher levels, so upgrading low level items would still be desirable because it would both increase the effects and the DC as well.

Also WaterLethe's [New DC] = [Old DC] + [Char Level - Item Level] formula is a more simpler approach that also works, even though it could potentially create scenarios where you wouldn't want to upgrade an item because there would not be a reason to. Still, even then I doubt it would change much since item with scaling DCs are pretty meh most of the time anyways, so its not like it would break anything. This could easily be made into a variant rule for GMs and players that would want to use it, and much like most variant rules, if there's edge cases then that's up to the GM to make rulings for them if they want to patch them.

[Trip.H]

Just as a heads up, the actual scaling of DCs by level "skips" levels every so often.
So this formula to +1 for each gap level does help, but all item DCs would still fall behind. This could be seen as an issue, or a good thing to encourage upgrades (but that's often not possible).

https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2627

It looks like these DCs are skipped:

17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37,
and last that should be player relevant is DC 41 being lost between levels 20 & 21.

So exequiel759's mention of looking at the base item's "On level DC comparison" to then apply to the scaled level is the best for being accurate.

Basically, look at your item and compare to that chart. If it's +1 for it's base level, than it should always be +1 for its scaled level.