PDA

View Full Version : Pricing and Inconsistency (3.5)



Fiery Diamond
2010-02-09, 07:51 PM
So, I own the Magic Item Compendium, and I noticed something rather odd. And dumb. In Core, healing items are MORE expensive than equivalent damage dealing items. In the MIC (and I think in a lot of other non-core) healing items are LESS expensive than equivalent damage dealing items. I find this inconsistency to be rather strange.

What are your thoughts on this inconsistency? Personally, I think core had it right = look at the corresponding spells: 1st level spell healing: 1d8+level(max 5), single target, touch. 1st level spell damage dealing: 1d6/level(max 5), single target, touch OR 1d4/level(max5), short cone, reflex. 3rd level spell healing: 3d8+level(max 15), single target, touch. 3rd level spell damage dealing: 1d6/level(max 10), 20 foot radius, long range, reflex OR 100 foot line, reflex. The level equivalent damage dealing spells are more potent.

Nich_Critic
2010-02-09, 08:03 PM
... I don't follow.

Because the healing spells are weaker then the damage spells, the corresponding items should be more expensive? In battle healing is already outpaced by damage, I don't see why it should be less efficient as well.

Personally, I think the MIC has it right. I remember reading somewhere in there that they lowered the prices of some of the items, because no one was using them at the higher price.

Runestar
2010-02-09, 08:07 PM
MIC prices items based on how useful they are, and less on on any specific formula.

Healing items were likely made cheaper because people weren't using them frequently enough. Healing during combat is suboptimal, and out-of-combat healing is cheap and readily available.

For example, a wand of CLW or vigor is just 750gp, you really need to go out of your way to top that if expect people to give it more than a second glance.

Ashiel
2010-02-09, 08:08 PM
The Magic Item Compendium changed a number of things. The most significant change was that it removed the cost increase for multiple different item abilities on the same item. By different, I mean stuff like "+1 resistance bonus to saving throws" and "+1 enhancement bonus to charisma".

Also, a lot of magic items that are utility based are too expensive. In combat healing is in most cases lacking (the healing belt helps against this greatly). Additionally, it keeps magic items reasonably priced so that you could have them when they would be useful or interesting, and worth paying for.

It may be that healing items are priced a little cheaper. I'd have to check it though.

lsfreak
2010-02-09, 08:11 PM
Healing in-combat is already a waste of actions, noticeable exceptions being the Crusader maneuvers and heal.

Healing should be easy, or fairly so. Going into combat at half-health is often a death wish. I have no problem with cheap, unlimited healing (belt of healing, wands of lesser vigor, binders, etc - honestly I wish the Heal skill actually let you heal, albeit not in a combat situation). Making people pay a ton for healing just ****s people over for not having clerics.

jokey665
2010-02-09, 08:15 PM
Healing in-combat is already a waste of actions, noticeable exceptions being the Crusader maneuvers and heal.

Healing should be easy, or fairly so. Going into combat at half-health is often a death wish. I have no problem with cheap, unlimited healing (belt of healing, wands of lesser vigor, binders, etc - honestly I wish the Heal skill actually let you heal, albeit not in a combat situation). Making people pay a ton for healing just ****s people over for not having clerics.
My games have remedied this somewhat. Spontaneous spellcasters get cantrips/orisons at will at 5th level (and 1st level spells at 10th level and so on), meaning a favored soul gets cure minor at will for unlimited out of combat healing.

There's also a few other things going on in my games that have unlimited healing, basically (notably one homebrew class that I'm still in testing with, but my players really like it so far and it isn't proving overpowered so it's going well).

Splendor
2010-02-09, 11:39 PM
I play in different games then most people it seems like. We don't play WoW. After a fight we don't all heal up to full and run to the next room (or area for WoW players). Combats are deadly, you can die. And if someone catches you after a fight when your low on HP you RUN!

We try to play smart and use tactics drawing enemies into traps, disabling one badguy at a time. We don't just change in a roll dice.

As for healing items. I agree that the MIC made Core healing way easy.
Prime example is the Healing Belt (750gp, 3charges/day) 1 Charge heals 2d8, 2 charges heal 3d8, 3 charges heal 4d8. While a potion of Cure serious wounds in the DMG costs 750 gp and heals 3d8+5. So you can buy a magical belt that heals about the same as the potion and can be used everday. Difference in power levels? "Well yeah but you can only wear one belt." Yeah and you can always take off your healing belt and put a different magical belt on.

I'm surprised it didn't add "spell potions" (mana potions for you WoW players) that granted used spell slots back,

AstralFire
2010-02-09, 11:46 PM
Okay. Some points to clear up.

1) The concept of healing every fight stems from video gaming in general, and it's called good tactics. If it's available to you, use it.
2) As someone who actually plays WoW quite a bit, I don't care for overuse of healing between fights or in the game in general; healing is a very potent effect on a game world. And that falls on me the DM to monitor and set the tone, and not as me the player with a 16 Wis/14 Int deciding it's better to keep running ahead than use what's available to us.
3) I'm sure there are more than a few people here who dislike WoW and yet prefer D&D games where health is not an attribute of attrition.

Temotei
2010-02-09, 11:50 PM
Okay. Some points to clear up.

1) The concept of healing every fight stems from video gaming in general, and it's called good tactics. If it's available to you, use it.
2) As someone who actually plays WoW quite a bit, I don't care for overuse of healing between fights or in the game in general; healing is a very potent effect on a game world. And that falls on me the DM to monitor and set the tone, and not as me the player with a 16 Wis/14 Int deciding it's better to keep running ahead than use what's available to us.
3) I'm sure there are more than a few people here who dislike WoW and yet prefer D&D games where health is not an attribute of attrition.

This. :smallsigh:

I played a trial version of World of Warcraft for ten days. It was fun for the first few, addictive the next few, and boring the last few. I got everything from the game I wanted in ten days. Vastly overrated in my opinion.

I'm thinking a lot of people on this board agree.

arguskos
2010-02-10, 12:11 AM
On the topic of unlimited healing, I'd like to simply chime in that it can cause bad and unexpected things to happen to your campaign world if you include it, and many folks (myself included) don't really like it much. That said, it's a fine addition, balance-wise.

As for this discrepancy, my bet is that the designers probably noted that paying out the nose for healing was, uh, stupid, and compensated appropriately. That, or they were smoking crack and didn't know what they printed. Since WotC materials seem to haphazard at the best of times (see: ToB errata), the latter theory is a fairly strong one. :smallsigh:

Kelb_Panthera
2010-02-10, 05:39 AM
MiC made limitless healing an option because there was a customer demand for that option, or so I would wager. Some people feel that being able to heal after every encounter breaks verisimilitude, others feel that it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Since MiC is a splat-book, you can choose, as DM, to disallow those items or you can choose to not purchase them as a player. It's really as simple as that.

SparkMandriller
2010-02-10, 05:46 AM
I play in different games then most people it seems like. We don't play WoW. After a fight we don't all heal up to full and run to the next room (or area for WoW players).

So why not? It's not like CLW wands cost much.

lord_khaine
2010-02-10, 06:13 AM
I play in different games then most people it seems like. We don't play WoW. After a fight we don't all heal up to full and run to the next room (or area for WoW players). Combats are deadly, you can die. And if someone catches you after a fight when your low on HP you RUN!

We try to play smart and use tactics drawing enemies into traps, disabling one badguy at a time. We don't just change in a roll dice.

As for healing items. I agree that the MIC made Core healing way easy.
Prime example is the Healing Belt (750gp, 3charges/day) 1 Charge heals 2d8, 2 charges heal 3d8, 3 charges heal 4d8. While a potion of Cure serious wounds in the DMG costs 750 gp and heals 3d8+5. So you can buy a magical belt that heals about the same as the potion and can be used everday. Difference in power levels? "Well yeah but you can only wear one belt." Yeah and you can always take off your healing belt and put a different magical belt on.



This is incredible misinformed, or just plain trolling.

If you dont know it, then lack of health is mainly a issue for the melee chars, where casters on the other hand are are not nearly in the same risk, because they usualy dont take much damage.
This means you are just increasing the imbalance of power that allready exist.


I'm surprised it didn't add "spell potions" (mana potions for you WoW players) that granted used spell slots back

Also, if you are going to troll this thread then at least do your reseach first, people are not using mana potions in wow raiding anymore.

BobVosh
2010-02-10, 06:35 AM
I'm surprised it didn't add "spell potions" (mana potions for you WoW players) that granted used spell slots back,

Wands of Mnemonic Enhancer have been popular for a while.

Vizzerdrix
2010-02-10, 06:49 AM
Wands of Mnemonic Enhancer have been popular for a while.

......

I'm using those from now on. Maybe Eternal wands of it. Or a dip into Brewmaster so I can make "mana" potions! YES! Mwahahahahaaa!

Wiz-5, Alchemist Savant-5, Brewmaster-10. Arcane Disciple for some cure and healing spells. dump most feats into cost and time reducers. Hmm.

Starbuck_II
2010-02-10, 07:39 AM
As for healing items. I agree that the MIC made Core healing way easy.
Prime example is the Healing Belt (750gp, 3charges/day) 1 Charge heals 2d8, 2 charges heal 3d8, 3 charges heal 4d8. While a potion of Cure serious wounds in the DMG costs 750 gp and heals 3d8+5. So you can buy a magical belt that heals about the same as the potion and can be used everday. Difference in power levels? "Well yeah but you can only wear one belt." Yeah and you can always take off your healing belt and put a different magical belt on.

I'm surprised it didn't add "spell potions" (mana potions for you WoW players) that granted used spell slots back,

Who uses CSW wands? Use for dame price of Healing Belt CLW wand. Why? You heal 50d8+50 hps (every charge). It takes 4 levels before the healing belt is worth it better (assuming you are level 6 or higher when buying).

Both are better for out of combat healing.

Runestar
2010-02-10, 07:59 AM
Belt of healing has the slight advantage of being able to "burst-heal" for 4d8hp during combat. Plus in a pinch, you can use it to damage that undead foe (especially incorporeal foes, since their miss chance does not apply).

That and potions of CMW are sorely overpriced anyways. I have no qualms about healing belt essentially being a potion which renews every day. Who in their right mind is going to waste 750gp healing 3d8+5(18hp average) once? You even provoke an AoO quaffing it during combat! :smallannoyed:

sofawall
2010-02-10, 08:34 AM
MiC made limitless healing an option because there was a customer demand for that option, or so I would wager. Some people feel that being able to heal after every encounter breaks verisimilitude, others feel that it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Since MiC is a splat-book, you can choose, as DM, to disallow those items or you can choose to not purchase them as a player. It's really as simple as that.

What does that have to do with allowing it or disallowing it?

KurtKatze
2010-02-10, 08:39 AM
Me and another GM houseruled the Belt of healing so it can only be used between fights and taken from a forum, that you have to wear one 24h before you can use it, so players dont just buy 10 healing belts and change em over and over again.

It is quite nice, as it releases the cleric of his healing duties between combat but keeps him important to combat intern healing still allowing him to buff the party or do other useful stuff.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-10, 08:43 AM
Also, if you are going to troll this thread then at least do your reseach first, people are not using mana potions in wow raiding anymore.

If this is serious, you get an awesomecookie.

I really doubt there's a good reason for this. Core items were priced arbitrarily due to legacy. MIC items were priced arbitrarily due to some people babbling about what magic items in campaigns should be.

The feel of MIC just...perturbs me. I use it a lot as a player. I practically run on magic-marts in my campaigns. But hearing Tordek say "+3 adamantine light fortification full plate" disgusts me, as does seeing Tordek trying on an arseload of magic boots that are just sitting there in an easily steal-able line.


What does that have to do with allowing it or disallowing it?

People whine more when you ban things from core.

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 09:00 AM
If this is serious, you get an awesomecookie.

I really doubt there's a good reason for this. Core items were priced arbitrarily due to legacy. MIC items were priced arbitrarily due to some people babbling about what magic items in campaigns should be.

The feel of MIC just...perturbs me. I use it a lot as a player. I practically run on magic-marts in my campaigns. But hearing Tordek say "+3 adamantine light fortification full plate" disgusts me, as does seeing Tordek trying on an arseload of magic boots that are just sitting there in an easily steal-able line.



People whine more when you ban things from core.

Heh, I don't have MIC for the same reason. It has some pretty cool things, but I simply don't like players having a dependable reliance on magic items in 95% of the games I run - not worth it.

And I don't raid hardcore anymore and haven't for a few years, but I would be very surprised if most top-end DPSers regularly made use of mana potions still. You're limited to one Type 1 potion CD an encounter, and a few thousand mana doesn't mean much against timing a Potion of Speed with Bloodlust or Heroism during a boss' soft enrage.

Can't think of much else a healer would use though.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-10, 09:00 AM
The feel of MIC just...perturbs me. I use it a lot as a player. I practically run on magic-marts in my campaigns. But hearing Tordek say "+3 adamantine light fortification full plate" disgusts me, as does seeing Tordek trying on an arseload of magic boots that are just sitting there in an easily steal-able line.


Wait, +3 light fort addy disgusts you? why? That armor just makes sense! It's full plate with less weak spots made of the best metal around and then enchanted. If you have thousands of gp, why wouldn't you get the high quality armor made of the hardest metal?:smallconfused:

Also: if they are selling a crapload of magic items, you can bet they have some pretty strong protection.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-10, 09:03 AM
Tordek saying "+3 light fortification" is what I have issue with. I let my players commission armor with specific properties from specialized wizard crafters, but stating things so bluntly in terms that exactly match those of the metagame...

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 09:08 AM
Wait, +3 light fort addy disgusts you? why? That armor just makes sense! It's full plate with less weak spots made of the best metal around and then enchanted. If you have thousands of gp, why wouldn't you get the high quality armor made of the hardest metal?:smallconfused:

Also: if they are selling a crapload of magic items, you can bet they have some pretty strong protection.

Because if players are commissioning items, it often becomes very difficult to maintain OoC/IC distinction in a meaningful, verisimilitudinal way, as there are few flavorful yet precise ways to say "+3 light fort."

Asheram
2010-02-10, 09:19 AM
Because if players are commissioning items, it often becomes very difficult to maintain OoC/IC distinction in a meaningful, verisimilitudinal way, as there are few flavorful yet precise ways to say "+3 light fort."

I think he reluctance from RP'ing a specially ordered item comes from the old "wish perversion". You're never completely sure that the DM won't **** you over. So if you don't state exactly what you want, then it's all up in the air.

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 09:33 AM
I think he reluctance from RP'ing a specially ordered item comes from the old "wish perversion". You're never completely sure that the DM won't **** you over. So if you don't state exactly what you want, then it's all up in the air.

Doubtful. I regularly recruited new players for my games (I got really tired of a lot of veteran players whining every moment about how This Setting Is Different when I warned them off the bat) and I've never been 'evil DM' and they still got stumbly at the rare times the need to discuss a magic item with some precision came up.

SilverStar
2010-02-10, 10:46 AM
I think he reluctance from RP'ing a specially ordered item comes from the old "wish perversion". You're never completely sure that the DM won't **** you over. So if you don't state exactly what you want, then it's all up in the air.

It's not all that difficult to properly roleplay and state what you want in the context of a game world.

If your DM is screwing you that badly, then you have more issues than you may be able to deal with.

Seatbelt
2010-02-10, 11:44 AM
Fortified Armor, or Reinforced Fullplate. Or Armor of Impenetrable Defenses, or Plate of Perfect Protection. These are all reasonable things to name your fullplate. I name my unique armor and swords when I buy them. When the DM asks what it is I say "Armor of Impenetrable Defense. It is a +3 light fortification adamantine fullplate." The character knows that it grants him very strong defensive abilities, and the DM knows what it is. Everybody wins. I fail to see how this is a problem? Even +1 swords etc. its a light magic longsword. If it just has an enhancement bonus on it, a +5 longsword is a supreme magic longsword.

Light, Improved, Strong, Powerful, Supreme. Seriously why is this a good reason to hate on magic items, and not on the schools for nerfing your vocabulary? :P

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 11:49 AM
The crucial adjective used in my preceding statement was 'precise.' I must extend my gratitude to you for perfectly illustrating my argument.


Strong

* adjective: powerful, sturdy, firm, robust, hard, solid, lusty, potent, stout, intense, tough, mighty, sound, vigorous, heavy

On a tangential subject, my lexicon is both diverse and flexible.

SilverStar
2010-02-10, 11:52 AM
The crucial adjective used in my preceding statement was 'precise.' I must extend my gratitude to you for perfectly illustrating my argument.

On a tangential subject, my lexicon is both diverse and flexible.

I'd guess that would depend on the degree of precision required by the DM in question.

I personally dislike players that don't at least give it a shot; your character is not just a bunch of numbers on a paper. However, I won't punish them if they do at least try.

Then again, my worlds are high-magic. Magic items aren't THAT rare.

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 11:57 AM
My essential view is this: language, to an extent, shapes how one thinks. I can see players pausing and being taken out of their immersion as they think about how to most accurately rephrase "+4 Flaming Defending Longsword of Desert Wind." Habit in games which don't expect immersion maintenance here makes it hard for players to think in this manner the same way they think about "I am a guy who is a master of close-range warfare" as opposed to "I am playing a Fighter who has a +40 bonus to attack."

Armor, which can bear even more enchantments, gets worse. After a while, you're talking about Greater Fortified Light Winged Breastplate of Greater Flame-Medium Spell-and-Lesser Vitriol's Bane.

You could just call it, "Breastplate of the Victorious Dawn" but then that describes nothing and thus must be followed with the actual stats.

SilverStar
2010-02-10, 12:01 PM
This is why I will generally accept a fair decripion, followed by an OOC aside regarding the exact game stats.

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 12:02 PM
This is why I will generally accept a fair decripion, followed by an OOC aside regarding the exact game stats.

There's no issue with that, but I do find it easier to maintain immersion by simply de-emphasizing magic items overall. Especially the ones which are simply "same as before but MORE."

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-10, 12:03 PM
This is why I will generally accept a fair decripion, followed by an OOC aside regarding the exact game stats.

The problem with this is that some people are not very good at coming up with a description on the spot. I know I need at least a ten minutes and MSWord to come up with something decent.

SilverStar
2010-02-10, 12:04 PM
Different DMs, different philosophies and styles.

Neither way is wrong.

Just don't try and get that continual item of True Striking and we're good.

Edit: I'd assume that with ten minutes and MSWord your description is going to be really good.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-10, 12:19 PM
Different DMs, different philosophies and styles.

Neither way is wrong.

Just don't try and get that continual item of True Striking and we're good.

Edit: I'd assume that with ten minutes and MSWord your description is going to be really good.

I'm a (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=786.0) writer by nature, (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?board=88.0) it's going to be decent at worst.

elonin
2010-02-10, 12:29 PM
Would anyone doubt that games that allow mic are vastly different than games that don't? The healing belt is so cheap for what it does that I'd pay to stack healing belt applications if I felt that I needed potions that much. Mostly a lesser vigor will handle that need. Then there are a number of items that give free moves or something to that extent. Am I saying that it's a bad thing? No just different. I do often hit up the mic when able.

edit: does anyone know of any comprehensive lists of magic gear including the completes and mic?

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-10, 12:31 PM
I do often hit up the mic when able.

That reminded me of quotes in the style of "One of these times we should write a song together or u can hit up the mic in one of my songs yo!! R.O.W.A featuring Tyler Campbell man hahaha"

hit up the mic, brother

Starbuck_II
2010-02-10, 12:31 PM
Would anyone doubt that games that allow mic are vastly different than games that don't? The healing belt is so cheap for what it does that I'd pay to stack healing belt applications if I felt that I needed potions that much. Mostly a lesser vigor will handle that need. Then there are a number of items that give free moves or something to that extent. Am I saying that it's a bad thing? No just different. I do often hit up the mic when able.

I guess, but one could just as easily UMD (or be a divine class) with Wand of CLW. Sure the belt has emergency useage, but that is rather limited.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-10, 12:35 PM
I try to keep a level head, in theory, when I'm lucid. Or at least that's what I tell myself. It's only an internet forum about a game.

GODDAMMIT! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheGame)

elonin
2010-02-10, 12:36 PM
But think of who gets umd. Rogues have a difficult time unless they are the face rogue (can't remember if beguiler does), bards do but they are on a lower tier than rogues, warlocks are a more interesting case having some other use for charisma.

SilverStar
2010-02-10, 12:36 PM
The MIC is a great resource to players and DMs alike. Thus, I think games that allow it are more enjoyable for everyone.

Swooper
2010-02-10, 12:39 PM
I'm surprised it didn't add "spell potions" (mana potions for you WoW players) that granted used spell slots back,
You mean like Pearls of Power? They're in the DMG. :smallamused:

SilverStar
2010-02-10, 12:42 PM
GODDAMMIT! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheGame)

:smallmad:

Thaaanks.

I can has Platinum Angel now?

Anyone can have UMD. It's a matter of how much you have to put into it.

The idea of a barbarian trying to scream at a magic item to get it to work just crossed my mind, though.

Thog: WORK OR I'LL SMASH!!

arguskos
2010-02-10, 12:45 PM
I'm surprised it didn't add "spell potions" (mana potions for you WoW players) that granted used spell slots back,
I'd like to make note that the Warcraft d20 (NOT THE WoW D20) has Clarity potions, which restore spell slots. Also, it has Replenishment potions with restore spell slots AND heal you a little. :smallamused:

elonin
2010-02-10, 01:11 PM
:smallmad:

Thaaanks.

I can has Platinum Angel now?

Anyone can have UMD. It's a matter of how much you have to put into it.

The idea of a barbarian trying to scream at a magic item to get it to work just crossed my mind, though.

Thog: WORK OR I'LL SMASH!!

I'm aware of that. Belkar got it to work with intimidate, though an eye of fear and flame isn't an item. For the most part that isn't practical. To be useful in UMD you have to invest max ranks in it and have at least a marginal cha with investment in items and/or feats. This is a skill you don't want to fail at by 10 or more. Sadly a large number of dms have decided to use rule 0 about fumbles and skills (critical failure on a roll of 1). As a fluke I once made a umd character who could activate a wand without a chance for mishap but had to max skill ranks and be human and use both feats for bonuses to umd and have a positive modifier to cha. This would be easier for scrolls which are cheaper but require more skill ranks to get those circumstance bonuses. The wand is difficult for the barbarian to do and the scroll would be even harder.

If we set the bar at 5th level when magic items become more available there is more of a case, but I've never heard of a barbarian or other melee type going this route. I just remember having trouble making this skill practical as it is better in theory than in actual use. First you are using mostly disposable items which are not free and your level will never be close to a caster of your level.

Starbuck_II
2010-02-10, 01:14 PM
I'm aware of that. Belkar got it to work with intimidate, though an eye of fear and flame isn't an item. For the most part that isn't practical. To be useful in UMD you have to invest max ranks in it and have at least a marginal cha with investment in items and/or feats. This is a skill you don't want to fail at by 10 or more. Sadly a large number of dms have decided to use rule 0 about fumbles and skills (critical failure on a roll of 1). As a fluke I once made a umd character who could activate a wand without a chance for mishap but had to max skill ranks and be human and use both feats for bonuses to umd and have a positive modifier to cha. This would be easier for scrolls which are cheaper but require more skill ranks to get those circumstance bonuses. The wand is difficult for the barbarian to do and the scroll would be even harder.


Wait... there are DMs who Crit fumble skills? I was assuming RAW.

faceroll
2010-02-10, 01:27 PM
Healing in-combat is already a waste of actions, noticeable exceptions being the Crusader maneuvers and heal.

Healing should be easy, or fairly so. Going into combat at half-health is often a death wish. I have no problem with cheap, unlimited healing (belt of healing, wands of lesser vigor, binders, etc - honestly I wish the Heal skill actually let you heal, albeit not in a combat situation). Making people pay a ton for healing just ****s people over for not having clerics.

It's a a reliquary from older editions, I think. I play with some old school gamers, and they put a sort of premium on healing.

Gnaeus
2010-02-10, 01:34 PM
I'm aware of that. Belkar got it to work with intimidate, though an eye of fear and flame isn't an item. For the most part that isn't practical. To be useful in UMD you have to invest max ranks in it and have at least a marginal cha with investment in items and/or feats. This is a skill you don't want to fail at by 10 or more. Sadly a large number of dms have decided to use rule 0 about fumbles and skills (critical failure on a roll of 1). As a fluke I once made a umd character who could activate a wand without a chance for mishap but had to max skill ranks and be human and use both feats for bonuses to umd and have a positive modifier to cha. This would be easier for scrolls which are cheaper but require more skill ranks to get those circumstance bonuses. The wand is difficult for the barbarian to do and the scroll would be even harder.

If we set the bar at 5th level when magic items become more available there is more of a case, but I've never heard of a barbarian or other melee type going this route. I just remember having trouble making this skill practical as it is better in theory than in actual use. First you are using mostly disposable items which are not free and your level will never be close to a caster of your level.


A 7th level caster with UMD cross class can have 5 ranks in UMD. With an investment of 800 gp (roughly the cost of a level 1 wand) on a UMD item, an Quasit has a +9, and a Imp has +11. That is an extra spell per turn 50% of the time. The Imp can't fail to activate a wand by 10.
My party has found that to be HUGE.

A 7th level rogue/beguiler/factotum with 11 ranks in UMD and a 12 charisma with a +4 item (800 gp) has +16. He succeeds in wand use on a 4+. Thats probably better than his chance of hitting the enemy with his weapon.

No, a barbarian probably will suck at UMD forever. A paladin could be good, but he already has swift action wands to use, and probably needs his skill points elsewhere. A Hexblade, Knight, Dragon Shaman or Samurai, on the other hand could do it. Say 7th level, for 5 ranks cross class, +4 for an 18 charisma, +4 for a UMD item and they are at +13. That is a 70% chance to use a wand, which is likely to be more useful than any other action any of those classes have in a round.

faceroll
2010-02-10, 01:39 PM
What 800gp +4 UMD item are you using?

Gnaeus
2010-02-10, 01:42 PM
What 800gp +4 UMD item are you using?

Skill ranks squared *100 is the formula in DMG, /2 because they have a caster with craft wondrous items. Its been a long time since I've seen a group without someone with craft wondrous.

In Magic mart world you might not have the caster crafting, so 1600 gp. But you would make up for it in ease of wand availability.

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 01:45 PM
Skill ranks squared *100 is the formula in DMG, /2 because they have a caster with craft wondrous items. Its been a long time since I've seen a group without someone with craft wondrous.

In Magic mart world you might not have the caster crafting, so 1600 gp. But you would make up for it in ease of wand availability.

I've rarely seen a group with any craft feats. I don't know many people who think crafting lots of magic items is neat.

Gnaeus
2010-02-10, 01:49 PM
I've rarely seen a group with any craft feats. I don't know many people who think crafting lots of magic items is neat.

They should do the math then. Virtually doubles your group's wealth. If MIC is in play, it guarantees effective items in virtually every slot, and lets you double up useful powers in key slots. The time spent searching through books to see what you can craft next game just adds to the fun. I like to think of it as the crafting minigame :smallsmile:

The only good reasons not to take it are:
1. Easy magic marts. (even then it is valuable if low wealth)
2. Leadership (if your dm lets you take a crafter to spend his feats and xp for it, that is clearly better)
3. Total lack of in game downtime or money.

Thrawn183
2010-02-10, 01:50 PM
I don't have a problem with groups healing up to full after every combat. In fact, I do have a problem with groups not doing so. I mean, you're injured, possibly badly, and instead of making the pain go away with the wave of a magic hand/wand/scroll/potion/other-healing-item, you charge the enemy?

How on earth is it in character to run around badly injured instead of seeking out magical healing? Unless everyone plays masochists or something, I just don't get it.

faceroll
2010-02-10, 01:52 PM
Tordek saying "+3 light fortification" is what I have issue with. I let my players commission armor with specific properties from specialized wizard crafters, but stating things so bluntly in terms that exactly match those of the metagame...

It perturbed me, too, but then I gave it some thought, and realized it's not that preposterous. Magic in D&D gives some really hard benchmarks of measuring. It's very precise. Timing 6 seconds, 1 minute, 1 hour is insanely precise, as are 5 foot squares, thanks to the magic rules. The price of making a MW sword into a +1 sword always requires 2,000 gold pieces, which is exactly 40lbs of gold. It wouldn't be long before the mages came up with a lexicon to refer to certain properties & objects in the highly discrete world they live in.


Skill ranks squared *100 is the formula in DMG, /2 because they have a caster with craft wondrous items. Its been a long time since I've seen a group without someone with craft wondrous.

In Magic mart world you might not have the caster crafting, so 1600 gp. But you would make up for it in ease of wand availability.

You can make anything with custom magic items. That's borderline abuse. I mean, if you follow your reasoning, we can make all sorts of conclusions with permanent items of wraithstrike and wish-traps.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-10, 01:53 PM
They should do the math then. Virtually doubles your group's wealth. If MIC is in play, it guarantees effective items in virtually every slot, and lets you double up useful powers in key slots. The time spent searching through books to see what you can craft next game just adds to the fun.

The only good reasons not to take it are:
1. Easy magic marts. (even then it is valuable if low wealth)
2. Leadership (if your dm lets you take a crafter to spend his feats and xp for it, that is clearly better)
3. Total lack of in game downtime or money.

4: Faster level-ups.

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 01:56 PM
The only good reasons not to take it are:
1. Easy magic marts. (even then it is valuable if low wealth)
2. Leadership (if your dm lets you take a crafter to spend his feats and xp for it, that is clearly better)
3. Total lack of in game downtime or money.

4. We don't like the effect on balance/christmas tree effect. :P

And my experiences aren't that unique; we're just traveling in very different circles. I simply feel a need to remind people of this now and then.

arguskos
2010-02-10, 02:02 PM
4. We don't like the effect on balance/christmas tree effect. :P

And my experiences aren't that unique; we're just traveling in very different circles. I simply feel a need to remind people of this now and then.
I'd like to add the all-important:

5. They don't LIKE crafting.

That is often forgotten, that people will only do what they enjoy. I personally like crafting, but that's just me.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-10, 02:03 PM
christmas tree effect.

What is the original of this term? It's being thrown around a lot. My nerves are being slowly worn down.

Gnaeus
2010-02-10, 02:04 PM
4: Faster level-ups.

Doesn't work with the math. By the time my character has spent 1000 xp on crafting, he has added almost 13,000 gp to the party. Thats virtually double the WBL for a 6th level character. More than that, he has added it more effectively, by guaranteeing that they have the most useful items available.

If that 1000 xp DOES force me down a level (with almost double WBL, remember) then because of the way XP works, I get more xp per fight which I can use to expand my available wealth further..... You should know that XP is a river, Sinfire.


4. We don't like the effect on balance/christmas tree effect. :P



For the munchkin, it is the most powerful feat in low level play. As a team player, I use it to break the WBL on the muggles, starting with the weakest ones, giving them options and better effectiveness in combat, so that they don't get put out at all the awesomeness that is 3.5 caster. It is really a very good feat for assisting balance.

AstralFire
2010-02-10, 02:10 PM
The onus is on myself as the DM to fix these issues, and not by dressing the characters up in lots of magic items if that's (frequently not) where they wish to see their character's competence originating from.

Christmas Tree effect is the pejorative describing what happens when characters are laden with dozens of magic items so that they mostly blend into each other and lose their cool factor. It also can make gameplay very complicated.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-10, 02:11 PM
Doesn't work with the math. By the time my character has spent 1000 xp on crafting, he has added almost 13,000 gp to the party. Thats virtually double the WBL for a 6th level character. More than that, he has added it more effectively, by guaranteeing that they have the most useful items available.

If that 1000 xp DOES force me down a level (with almost double WBL, remember) then because of the way XP works, I get more xp per fight which I can use to expand my available wealth further..... You should know that XP is a river, Sinfire.

I do know that XP is a River. I also know that every river has a Mouth. That mouth would be spells like Wish, True Creation, Gate, etc. There's an Artificer infusion that restores charges to Wands at the cost of XP. Crafting isn't the only way to sink XP.

One of the reasons I like the Artificer's Craft Reserve is that you can choose for some or all of the XP you gain each encounter to got into the reserve, thus delaying you a level while giving you a nice pool to work with. Incredibly useful. Of course, comes with the drawback of Artificers being ****ing complicated six ways to Sunday, but sometimes it is worth thinking about.

Gnaeus
2010-02-10, 02:16 PM
You can make anything with custom magic items. That's borderline abuse. I mean, if you follow your reasoning, we can make all sorts of conclusions with permanent items of wraithstrike and wish-traps.

RAW you can. Presumably the DM would stop you long before you got there.

I don't think that a +4 or 5 skill item using the charts in the back of the DMG is anything like borderline abuse. Some DMs may disagree, which is fine, but the chart is presumably in the book so that people can use it, so I, personally, feel pretty comfortable with it as RAW and RAI. Reactions may vary.

Of course, my DM taught me this trick, by using lots of expendibles using mooks with custom UMD items.

elonin
2010-02-10, 02:17 PM
It's a a reliquary from older editions, I think. I play with some old school gamers, and they put a sort of premium on healing.

Yup, I've been stuck with more than my fair share of these.


A 7th level caster with UMD cross class can have 5 ranks in UMD. With an investment of 800 gp (roughly the cost of a level 1 wand) on a UMD item, an Quasit has a +9, and a Imp has +11. That is an extra spell per turn 50% of the time. The Imp can't fail to activate a wand by 10.
My party has found that to be HUGE.

A 7th level rogue/beguiler/factotum with 11 ranks in UMD and a 12 charisma with a +4 item (800 gp) has +16. He succeeds in wand use on a 4+. Thats probably better than his chance of hitting the enemy with his weapon.

No, a barbarian probably will suck at UMD forever. A paladin could be good, but he already has swift action wands to use, and probably needs his skill points elsewhere. A Hexblade, Knight, Dragon Shaman or Samurai, on the other hand could do it. Say 7th level, for 5 ranks cross class, +4 for an 18 charisma, +4 for a UMD item and they are at +13. That is a 70% chance to use a wand, which is likely to be more useful than any other action any of those classes have in a round.

My point was more to address people who don't have umd as a class skill. When using the rogue as an example I did use level 1 for a reason. I did suggest also that give a higher level and it becomes more possible. For a quasit familiar you'd have to spend a feat on umd. Your familiar using a disposable item each turn can be great but can also make you broke quickly. Don't forget that rogue also has to have points in spell craft and decipher script to make the most out of umd, else he'll always be making the check blindly.

Gnaeus
2010-02-10, 02:23 PM
The onus is on myself as the DM to fix these issues, and not by dressing the characters up in lots of magic items if that's (frequently not) where they wish to see their character's competence originating from.

I would much rather fix balance issues myself, in game, as a player, than make the DM do it. The DM doing it usually hurts worse.

And you aren't dressing the characters up. They are dressing themselves up. Very different.

If you like to ban craft wondrous in your games, thats fine. It is raw legal, very useful and (in my opinion) lots of fun.


I do know that XP is a River. I also know that every river has a Mouth. That mouth would be spells like Wish, True Creation, Gate, etc. There's an Artificer infusion that restores charges to Wands at the cost of XP. Crafting isn't the only way to sink XP.

One of the reasons I like the Artificer's Craft Reserve is

Yes, artificers can do it better. But any full caster and most hybrid casters can do it. Wish and gate are only useful at high level play, but crafting starts level 1-3. 6 for hybrids.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-10, 02:26 PM
we're just traveling in very different circles.

Gnaeus, do you really think that any minds will be changed as a result of this discussion? It's a matter of taste rather than of brute functionality. Oranges are nutritious; stating that won't make somebody like oranges. Lots of crafting is a functional way to do things; stating that won't "convert" people to doing it.

Gnaeus
2010-02-10, 02:31 PM
Gnaeus, do you really think that any minds will be changed as a result of this discussion? It's a matter of taste rather than of brute functionality. Oranges are nutritious; stating that won't make somebody like oranges. Lots of crafting is a functional way to do things; stating that won't "convert" people to doing it.

Do I think that any of the primary posters will change their minds on crafting? No. And I don't really care if they do. Its their game, they should play how they like. I don't get any points if Astral changes her mind.

Do I think that discussion on craft wondrous items is relevant to discussion of MIC and pricing? Yes.

Do I think that some people reading the thread might find it useful? Or form an opinion if they didn't have one before. Yes.

elonin
2010-02-10, 02:31 PM
Do you consider it abusive to wear items like the boots of agile leaping that replace strength with dex for jump checks?

The one time I've wanted to craft wondrous items is for those rare items when I've got enough xp to risk loosing some due to double leveling. It's better to bank that into an item rather than just loose it. I've also considered it when I've needed a few extra gold to put spells into my book.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-10, 02:38 PM
Do you consider it abusive to wear items like the boots of agile leaping that replace strength with dex for jump checks?

Anyone who does needs to be kicked in the face with said boots.

faceroll
2010-02-10, 02:44 PM
Anyone who does needs to be kicked in the face with said boots.

At first I thought you were saying that about anyone who used boots to switch attributes, but that didn't make much sense, given your post history, but it seemed like such poor sarcasm, and then I realized there was confusion due to ambiguous pronouns.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-10, 02:49 PM
At first I thought you were saying that about anyone who used boots to switch attributes, but that didn't make much sense, given your post history, but it seemed like such poor sarcasm, and then I realized there was confusion due to ambiguous pronouns.

Grammatical errors like that are why I had to retake my English course.

elonin
2010-02-10, 02:51 PM
Sorry for the confusion. My skill monkeys would all benefit from using dex for jump rather than strength. Then again on another subject my skill monkeys also tend to go after a 3 level dip in swashbuckler for int to damage.

sofawall
2010-02-10, 04:43 PM
Sorry for the confusion. My skill monkeys would all benefit from using dex for jump rather than strength. Then again on another subject my skill monkeys also tend to go after a 3 level dip in swashbuckler for int to damage.

I prefer a 20 level dip into Factotum :P

Kelb_Panthera
2010-02-10, 09:13 PM
What does that have to do with allowing it or disallowing it?

The core rulebooks are the game. Splat-books are expansions to the game. Most players would be much, much more irritated if you were to ban things out of core than they would be if you told them that you didn't allow MiC or some other splat-book in your game. More importantly, the game designers assumed that the things in core would be used in the game, where that assumption doesn't hold for any splat-book. It doesn't really affect the balance of the game if you disallow a particular splat-book.

Disclaimer: I know that the game isn't really balanced, but that's another discussion altogether.

Doc Roc
2010-02-10, 09:33 PM
The core rulebooks are the game. Splat-books are expansions to the game. Most players would be much, much more irritated if you were to ban things out of core than they would be if you told them that you didn't allow MiC or some other splat-book in your game. More importantly, the game designers assumed that the things in core would be used in the game, where that assumption doesn't hold for any splat-book. It doesn't really affect the balance of the game if you disallow a particular splat-book.

Disclaimer: I know that the game isn't really balanced, but that's another discussion altogether.

I, myself, would rather make your disclaimer the post. Core is very poorly balanced. Really very very poorly.

aboyd
2010-02-11, 12:15 AM
As for healing items. I agree that the MIC made Core healing way easy.
Prime example is the Healing Belt (750gp, 3charges/day) 1 Charge heals 2d8, 2 charges heal 3d8, 3 charges heal 4d8. While a potion of Cure serious wounds in the DMG costs 750 gp and heals 3d8+5. So you can buy a magical belt that heals about the same as the potion and can be used everday.
I fixed this just by house-ruling it -- I built the healing belt using the original DMG rules (instead of the by-the-seat-of-our-pants MIC) and used that price. With the DMG rules, a healing belt costs 2560 gold (about 4 potions worth). My players still bought 'em, but at least I felt OK about it.

arguskos
2010-02-11, 12:22 AM
You know, this is annoying me. The Magic Item Compendium just eyeballs stuff, rather than using the very guidelines and rules set out in the DMG for making and pricing magic items. Is there a reason that they just said "eh, screw doing it the way we recommend, and let's just assign numbers to stuff" rather than actually using the rules they made for such things?

Runestar
2010-02-11, 12:36 AM
Except that MIC is supposed to reflect the latest magic item pricing guidelines. So it should be more "balanced" than DMG at any rate. In this light, saying you allow DMG stuff but ban MIC seems more of a knee-jerk reaction than anything else.

aboyd
2010-02-11, 01:10 AM
Except that MIC is supposed to reflect the latest magic item pricing guidelines. So it should be more "balanced" than DMG at any rate. In this light, saying you allow DMG stuff but ban MIC seems more of a knee-jerk reaction than anything else.
But their "guideline" was to abandon any type of table or system at all and just price based upon coolness or, what did they say? Oh yeah, "compelling." The MIC prices are based upon comparing to a small subset of DMG magic items that they thought were "compelling" and they did not compare or try to stay in line with anything they found to be too expensive to justify. Thus, they tried to keep healing items in line with a wand of CLW, since that's what everyone thinks is "worth the price." They would not try to put healing items around the price of a wand of Cure Serious Wounds, as that is super-expensive and nobody buys it.

So if you are not a fan of that reasoning, then even if those guidelines are the latest, you may not feel they are the greatest. And I think that's fine for just about any DM to decide.

For my part, I agree with the MIC authors somewhat. I allow the MIC into my game with very few modifications. I like that my players have bought boots that give 10' teleport, and bracers that give 1 extra attack per day, and a lot of other neat things that have a cool little benefit for a cool little price.

Having said that, my game world runs a bit like the Iron Heroes game, if you've heard of that. Basically, healing is super-rare. At low levels, odds are good that if you are wounded, you're using Heal checks and spending a week at the inn. It's not too terrible -- we fast-forward through that stuff and get right back to the adventure -- but it does change battles. Lots more retreating, on both sides. And that's why I modified the healing belt back to the normal (high) DMG price.

Devils_Advocate
2010-02-11, 03:37 AM
I play in different games then most people it seems like. We don't play WoW.
Isn't magic healing sort of a staple of D&D and many similar games? Why would you associate it with WoW in particular?


After a fight we don't all heal up to full and run to the next room (or area for WoW players).
So, do you do the "15 minute adventuring day" thing where you fall back after one fight? Or do you make a point of moving on to the next room without healing?


Combats are deadly, you can die.
Attempting to mitigate that risk seems like a reasonable course of action.


And if someone catches you after a fight when your low on HP you RUN!
It seems to be oddly common for players and DMs to have PCs and monsters fight to the death rather than retreat from a losing battle. Maybe that option never occurred to them. (http://www.rpgworldcomic.com/d/20000930.html)


Tordek saying "+3 light fortification" is what I have issue with. I let my players commission armor with specific properties from specialized wizard crafters, but stating things so bluntly in terms that exactly match those of the metagame...
Does it also bother you that players use English instead of conlangs when their characters are supposed to be speaking Common or Elven or whatever?


You mean like Pearls of Power? They're in the DMG. :smallamused:
They're also usable once per day, rather than expendable like potions. They're also a considerably cheaper means of casting more spells per day than Rings of Wizardry. Probably because they're the option only available to prepared casters.

"Ha! Suck it hard, sorcerers! Next time try being a real spellcaster."


How on earth is it in character to run around badly injured instead of seeking out magical healing? Unless everyone plays masochists or something, I just don't get it.
Some players seem to feel that making sensible, practical decisions in character is metagaming. Maybe they have a point. After all, if you're supposed to be portraying characters who choose to go into areas infested with dangerous monsters and fight them, how sane is it really reasonable to have them act? :smallamused:


It perturbed me, too, but then I gave it some thought, and realized it's not that preposterous. Magic in D&D gives some really hard benchmarks of measuring. It's very precise. Timing 6 seconds, 1 minute, 1 hour is insanely precise, as are 5 foot squares, thanks to the magic rules. The price of making a MW sword into a +1 sword always requires 2,000 gold pieces, which is exactly 40lbs of gold. It wouldn't be long before the mages came up with a lexicon to refer to certain properties & objects in the highly discrete world they live in.
In D&D 3.5, a round is a standardized small unit of time defined as how long a novice druid's summon spell lasts. Gold is worth precisely ten times as much as silver by weight because a single casting of wish can create exactly ten times as many pounds of silver as it can gold. (What, did you think that market prices determine how wish works? And that the price ratio of two precious metals is always a power of 10 by coincidence?) And so on. Stuff like this should require a DC 15 Knowledge (arcana) check at most. Wizards are going to be aware of this stuff; it's fairly basic magical knowledge.


The core rulebooks are the game.
The rules that a DM chooses to use are the rules of the game that the DM runs. Though there's more to a game than the rules and books used in it.


Most players would be much, much more irritated if you were to ban things out of core than they would be if you told them that you didn't allow MiC or some other splat-book in your game.
Many would be far more irritated with a DM who forbid balanced supplemental material but allowed overpowered core material. Are you aware that the term "CoDzilla" was originally produced to describe how a resentful player could respond to such restrictions?


It doesn't really affect the balance of the game if you disallow a particular splat-book.
You don't think that the decision to allow or disallow a given splatbook can have an impact on game balance? :smallconfused:


You know, this is annoying me. The Magic Item Compendium just eyeballs stuff, rather than using the very guidelines and rules set out in the DMG for making and pricing magic items. Is there a reason that they just said "eh, screw doing it the way we recommend, and let's just assign numbers to stuff" rather than actually using the rules they made for such things?
:smallannoyed: They're not rules, they're guidelines for estimating value. That's why the table is labeled "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values". Magic items are supposed to be priced based on usefulness, much like encounters are supposed to be CRed based on difficulty. You're told to use your own best judgment to determine the final value, because a simple formula can't take everything into account. They used their judgment to price the magic items in the MIC. That's following what the DMG says.

Players are not entitled to create whatever magic items they want, priced according to that table without modification. That most certainly is not "RAW". Like custom races, classes, spells, and so on, custom magic items are homebrew and balance is ultimately left up to the DM. Page 214 of the DMG calls inventing new magic items a "variant".

That said, some might like having most options be a bad deal for most people most of the time, with relatively few options in wide use among lots of people. That is sort of how a lot of stuff works out in real life. So maybe Rings of Protection, like cars, are popular because they're more useful to so many people than other things that they could buy for the same price.