Monk's Belt- definitely gives Wis to AC right?

[Brock Samson]

Most everyone I've come across agrees that wearing a Monk's Belt gives you Wis to AC, as well as a +1 bonus besides. I've come across one or two people who claim it only gives the +1 bonus.

Can I get a great reference/errata/ruling/something to either confirm or deny that yes it absolutely does confer Wis to AC or no it absolutely does not?

[Brock Samson]

For a player who's not a Monk. Obviously.

[Ravens_cry]

Most everyone I've come across agrees that wearing a Monk's Belt gives you Wis to AC, as well as a +1 bonus besides. I've come across one or two people who claim it only gives the +1 bonus.

Can I get a great reference/errata/ruling/something to either confirm or deny that yes it absolutely does confer Wis to AC or no it absolutely does not?
To the Bat-SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#beltMonks), Robin!
I can confirm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/monk.htm) that, yes, it gives Wisdom bonus to AC and a +1 bonus to AC as well.

[Coidzor]

Monk's belt writeup (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#beltMonks)(emphasis added):


Belt, Monk’s

This simple rope belt, when wrapped around a character’s waist, confers great ability in unarmed combat. The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. If donned by a character with the Stunning Fist feat, the belt lets her make one additional stunning attack per day. If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk. This AC bonus functions just like the monk’s AC bonus.

Moderate transmutation; CL 10th; Craft Wondrous Item, righteous might or transformation; Price 13,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.

Monk Class Feature being referred to: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/monk.htm)

AC Bonus (Ex)

When unarmored and unencumbered, the monk adds her Wisdom bonus (if any) to her AC. In addition, a monk gains a +1 bonus to AC at 5th level. This bonus increases by 1 for every five monk levels thereafter (+2 at 10th, +3 at 15th, and +4 at 20th level).

These bonuses to AC apply even against touch attacks or when the monk is flat-footed. She loses these bonuses when she is immobilized or helpless, when she wears any armor, when she carries a shield, or when she carries a medium or heavy load.

Thusly, if a character gets the AC bonus class feature of a 5th level monk, they get wisdom to AC in addition to an untyped +1 bonus to AC.

That's just plain RAW.

[Ravens_cry]

Addendum. You have to be unarmoured to get the wisdom bonus to AC, but, depending on class, that's OK.
A Divine Trickster would probably like it.

[Drelua]

It does give WIS to AC, yes, in 3.5. For some reason, the monk's robe in Pathfinder does not; that's probably where the confusion comes from. In PF, you just get the +1, in 3.5, yes, you do get WIS+1.

[Coidzor]

Addendum. You have to be unarmoured to get the wisdom bonus to AC, but, depending on class, that's OK.
A Divine Trickster would probably like it.

Especially if clothing or robes of armor + X are allowed and can take on magic armor properties, so that one doesn't have to give those up.

Because, really, wisdom to AC generally isn't quite worth it in comparison to giving up armor properties.

[Brock Samson]

Well, I only have Craft Wonderous Item. And a +6 to AC (INCLUDING touch and flatfooted AC) is certainly not something to sneeze about.

[Optimator]

It definitely does. The AC by level and Wis to AC are the same ability, called "AC Bonus", which the belt gives you. Open and shut.

[Keneth]

It does give WIS to AC, yes, in 3.5. For some reason, the monk's robe in Pathfinder does not; that's probably where the confusion comes from. In PF, you just get the +1, in 3.5, yes, you do get WIS+1. Actually that's no where the confusion comes from. This has been the subject of heated discussions long before PF and right up until the point when it was cleared up in the official FAQ. Some DMs (like me) still houserule it to only give a +1 bonus anyway.

[Chronos]

It's a bigger issue for druids than for clerics, since, first, it's easier to get a belt on a dire bear than it is to get actual armor, and second, druids can pump their Wis insanely high via the Owl's Insight spell.

[Rubik]

Actually that's no where the confusion comes from. This has been the subject of heated discussions long before PF and right up until the point when it was cleared up in the official FAQ. Some DMs (like me) still houserule it to only give a +1 bonus anyway.There is no possible situation where I would pay that much money for so very little.

I can get a 50% miss chance for about that (ring of entropic deflection + speed boost).

[Blisstake]

RAW: Absolutely, as above posters have said.

RAI: No freaking clue.

[deuxhero]

Especially if clothing or robes of armor + X are allowed and can take on magic armor properties, so that one doesn't have to give those up.

Because, really, wisdom to AC generally isn't quite worth it in comparison to giving up armor properties.

It is handy for core druids though, much easier to take off a belt turn into animal form and have a party member it on you (you could do it with a Hand of the Mage if you can figure out how to easily get one on yourself AND they get Unarmed Strikes up to their BAB as primaries with all natural attacks as secondaries if they want to.

[DrDeth]

Yes, it does. But it shouldn't. It's too inexpensive to add +5 to AC. It's supposed to be for MONKS.

Without a doubt, this is the best item for a druid, assuming he can get a wild clasp to add to it. Pretty darn good for a cloistered cleric, too.

[Rubik]

Yes, it does. But it shouldn't. It's too inexpensive to add +5 to AC. It's supposed to be for MONKS.It's still less effective than a single stackable miss-chance, which can be gotten for about the same amount.


Without a doubt, this is the best item for a druid, assuming he can get a wild clasp to add to it. Pretty darn good for a cloistered cleric, too.Psywars love it too, especially since it stacks nicely with bonuses from Inertial Armor and Force Screen.

[sonofzeal]

It's still less effective than a single stackable miss-chance, which can be gotten for about the same amount.
My understanding was that RC clarified that miss chances never stack, only the highest one applies..

[Rubik]

My understanding was that RC clarified that miss chances never stack, only the highest one applies..That entirely depends on what's causing it. I mean, Blink applies a miss chance because you're on an entirely different plane, whereas Displacement is because they're trying to hit an area several feet to the side. The ring of entropic deflection literally pushes arrows and such away from you with chaotic forces (not [force]s). Likewise, Mirror Image is because someone is trying to hit a figment that isn't even in your space (though, granted, this isn't a miss chance, technically).

They would stack, if only because they're from entirely different types of effects. Miss chances due to the same thing (such as concealment) wouldn't stack, but...

Then again, I don't have the RC, so I can't make a RAW assessment on it.

[olentu]

That entirely depends on what's causing it. I mean, Blink applies a miss chance because you're on an entirely different plane, whereas Displacement is because they're trying to hit an area several feet to the side. The ring of entropic deflection literally pushes arrows and such away from you with chaotic forces (not [force]s). Likewise, Mirror Image is because someone is trying to hit a figment that isn't even in your space (though, granted, this isn't a miss chance, technically).

They would stack, if only because they're from entirely different types of effects. Miss chances due to the same thing (such as concealment) wouldn't stack, but...

Unfortunately it is multiple miss chances from any source as I recall. I believe the example was someone with a miss chance from concealment and being incorporeal which are clearly different types of effects.

[Rubik]

Unfortunately it is multiple miss chances from any source as I recall. I believe the example was someone with a miss chance from concealment and being incorporeal which are clearly different types of effects.That's stupid.

It's a good thing I don't own the book so I can't use that 'errata'.

Whoever heard of pay-to-play errata, anyway?

[Mystify]

Yes, it gives wisdom to AC. No, that is not overpowered. You have to not wear armour for it to work, so it only helps if you are not wearing armour. Clerics could get some use out of it, but they use sheilds and armour so its a marginal increase, if any. In fact, the shield as an extra enchantment slot is far more useful to AC.
Druids are the place where it is most problematic. However, +1 beasthide fullplate costs 10k, and it will give a +9 AC when you are in wildshape. Wild plate costs more, but its still in the same neighborhood. A 18 wis druid, with a +2 wisdom from class increases, 4 from owls wisdom, and you have a 6 or 7 AC boost. Compared to the other options available to a druid, it is not that unreasonable. Whether those items are problematic is a matter of its own concern, but its not really any more problematic.
Also, this is taking up the belt slot. There are lots of useful belts they could be wearing instead.

[Curmudgeon]

My understanding was that RC clarified that miss chances never stack, only the highest one applies..
Rules Compendium made two changes to the rules for figuring miss chances, both on page 32. The first change conflated all miss chances to be the same as concealment, so Mirror Image (miss chance = (n-1)/n, where n is the number of images) won't stack with anything. The second change is called Degrees of Concealment:
However, the DM can rule that certain situations provide more or less than typical concealment, and modify the miss chance accordingly. This means that miss chance is always whatever any individual DM decides, with official blessing for DM fiat coming from a WotC rulebook.

Personally, as a DM I always uses the second change to make the miss chance be exactly what it would be if that first change didn't exist: i.e., we're back to the core rules, where miss chances of different types stack.

[olentu]

Rules Compendium made two changes to the rules for figuring miss chances, both on page 32. The first change conflated all miss chances to be the same as concealment, so Mirror Image (miss chance = (n-1)/n, where n is the number of images) won't stack with anything. The second change is called Degrees of Concealment: This means that miss chance is always whatever any individual DM decides, with official blessing for DM fiat coming from a WotC rulebook.

Personally, as a DM I always uses the second change to make the miss chance be exactly what it would be if that first change didn't exist: i.e., we're back to the core rules, where miss chances of different types stack.

Miss chance always was whatever the DM decided anyway as DMs always had official sanction to do whatever. Nothing has changed on that front.

[Averis Vol]

That's stupid.

It's a good thing I don't own the book so I can't use that 'errata'.

Whoever heard of pay-to-play errata, anyway?

actually you can download a bunch of erretas from the wotc site for free, or i circumvented the system somehow.

[georgie_leech]

Rules Compendium made two changes to the rules for figuring miss chances, both on page 32. The first change conflated all miss chances to be the same as concealment, so Mirror Image (miss chance = (n-1)/n, where n is the number of images) won't stack with anything. The second change is called Degrees of Concealment: This means that miss chance is always whatever any individual DM decides, with official blessing for DM fiat coming from a WotC rulebook.

Personally, as a DM I always uses the second change to make the miss chance be exactly what it would be if that first change didn't exist: i.e., we're back to the core rules, where miss chances of different types stack.

My rule, although perhaps a bit clunky, was always to just role for each obviously different miss chance. So if you were shooting at a displaced ghost that was behind total cover, you'd roll against concealment, incorporeality, and the displacement.

[Curmudgeon]

Miss chance always was whatever the DM decided anyway as DMs always had official sanction to do whatever. Nothing has changed on that front.
The change is that, rather than a blanket "Rule 0" permission to change any rule (which will often cause cause player dissent because they can point to the rules which say how things normally work), this is something a DM can point to to show a rule which applies this permission specifically to miss chances.

[olentu]

The change is that, rather than a blanket "Rule 0" permission to change any rule (which will often cause cause player dissent because they can point to the rules which say how things normally work), this is something a DM can point to to show a rule which applies this permission specifically to miss chances.

I would expect that of all players some players would find things less distressing in this case as opposed to more. But the possible effects in relationship to player psychology is hardly a rules change.

[sonofzeal]

actually you can download a bunch of erretas from the wotc site for free, or i circumvented the system somehow.
Most errata is free. Some officially published books make changes to the rules not covered in errata - CWar and CArc have text about what happens when you cease qualifying for a PrC, CPsi changes several XPH psi powers (notably Astral Construct) in ways not covered by errata, and Rules Compendium contains a lot of "clarifications" that border on outright errata.

This is what they were talking about as "errata you pay for".

[Keneth]

There is no possible situation where I would pay that much money for so very little. True but it was meant to be worn by monks, not abused by druids. Of course the damage increase, stunning fist use, and AC bonus still aren't quite worth that much, so I reduce the price accordingly in my games but that's beside the point.

[Gullintanni]

True but it was meant to be worn by monks, not abused by druids.

I'm not really sure you can make a case for this. From SRD:

Belt, Monk’s

This simple rope belt, when wrapped around a character’s waist, confers great ability in unarmed combat. The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. If donned by a character with the Stunning Fist feat, the belt lets her make one additional stunning attack per day. If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk. This AC bonus functions just like the monk’s AC bonus.

Bolded for emphasis. The last line there makes it pretty clear the designers had planned for the item to be used by non-monks.

[Tyndmyr]

It's still less effective than a single stackable miss-chance, which can be gotten for about the same amount.

But AC AND miss chance is even better. So...I can see justification for buying one.

In practice, I tend to prefer Belt of Battle, myself.

[Mystify]

But AC AND miss chance is even better. So...I can see justification for buying one.

In practice, I tend to prefer Belt of Battle, myself.

Belts of battle are really poorly balanced. When a 12k item is still one of the superstar items for a level 20 group, something is off.

[Gullintanni]

Belts of battle are really poorly balanced. When a 12k item is still one of the superstar items for a level 20 group, something is off.

I don't really find it's poorly balanced at all. It's a great, versatile tool but it's not really the belt that's doing the legwork. All it does is grant you additional actions once or twice a day. If you have lousy abilities to begin with, then the belt is weak, and if you have really powerful abilities, then it's really powerful.

It's really only as powerful as you are. It's also very use limited. It's great for characters who need to squeeze out one or two rounds of power to go nova in a difficult encounter, but once it's used, it's useless for the day. I would say, based on its limitations, that it's a perfect balance of utility vs. cost vs. scalability.

[Mystify]

I don't really find it's poorly balanced at all. It's a great, versatile tool but it's not really the belt that's doing the legwork. All it does is grant you additional actions once or twice a day. If you have lousy abilities to begin with, then the belt is weak, and if you have really powerful abilities, then it's really powerful.

It's really only as powerful as you are. It's also very use limited. It's great for characters who need to squeeze out one or two rounds of power to go nova in a difficult encounter, but once it's used, it's useless for the day. I would say, based on its limitations, that it's a perfect balance of utility vs. cost vs. scalability.
Tell that to all of the encounteres we splattered with them. EVERYONE had one, because they are THAT GOOD. Remember, action economy is king at high levels. Belt of battle lets you toy with it. Time stop is extremely powerful, and it nets you about 3 extra rounds. This 12k item gives you 1/3 the power of a 9th level spell, as a swift action.

[Gullintanni]

Tell that to all of the encounteres we splattered with them. EVERYONE had one, because they are THAT GOOD. Remember, action economy is king at high levels. Belt of battle lets you toy with it. Time stop is extremely powerful, and it nets you about 3 extra rounds. This 12k item gives you 1/3 the power of a 9th level spell, as a swift action.

Put Belts of Battle on a party of 4 20th level Monks. See how the party manages the same encounter and tell me the problem is with the item.

Tier 1 is Tier 1 for a reason, and Belts of Battle act as a force multiplier. If your input force is low, then the impact of a Belt of Battle is low. If your input force is extremely high, then the impact of a Belt of Battle is high.

Plus, even then, you're steamrolling one encounter. Big deal. If you're a DM, eschew the 15 minute adventuring day. Keep in mind that your players can nova on one encounter by breaking the action economy, and plan your campaign accordingly.

[sonofzeal]

Tell that to all of the encounteres we splattered with them. EVERYONE had one, because they are THAT GOOD. Remember, action economy is king at high levels. Belt of battle lets you toy with it. Time stop is extremely powerful, and it nets you about 3 extra rounds. This 12k item gives you 1/3 the power of a 9th level spell, as a swift action.
It's powerful, but Gullintanni kind of has a point - its power is based entirely on your own. A 1st level character with a Belt of Battle wouldn't be all that much better than one without. Heck, at 1st level, the static effect of a 750gp Belt of Healing is probably more valuable. But the BoB is valuable, not for what it does, but for what it allows you to do. A 10th lvl character gets way more out of it than a 5th lvl character, and a 20th lvl even more so. I'm not surprised they become ubiquitous at the top levels. For a 1000th lvl character, they're probably the best non-custom magic item in the game!

[Keneth]

Bolded for emphasis. The last line there makes it pretty clear the designers had planned for the item to be used by non-monks. I never said the devs didn't plan for it to be used by others but it's meant to be used by monks thematically and when other classes get more use out of it, it irks me. Hence no Wis bonus, problem solved. It's not like divine casters need any more love. :smalltongue:

[DrDeth]

Druids are the place where it is most problematic. However, +1 beasthide fullplate costs 10k, and it will give a +9 AC when you are in wildshape. Wild plate costs more, but its still in the same neighborhood. A 18 wis druid, with a +2 wisdom from class increases, 4 from owls wisdom, and you have a 6 or 7 AC boost. .

With fullplate you have to burn a feat and it slows your movement, not to mention taking a HUGE bite out of many skills.

There's a reason why even few fighters wear anything but mithral plate.

[Gullintanni]

I never said the devs didn't plan for it to be used by others but it's meant to be used by monks thematically and when other classes get more use out of it, it irks me. Hence no Wis bonus, problem solved. It's not like divine casters need any more love. :smalltongue:

Yeah, I guess I can see why it might be bothersome to some DMs. And really, it does devalue (further) the Monk chassis, so I can see why one might limit the use for the Monk's belt.

And the bolded portion...QFT. :smallsmile:

I don't really mind Monk's Belt granting Wis-to-AC, but I can certainly buy your logic. And it really doesn't take anything away from the game. Druids hardly NEED the AC to perform while Wildshaped. A 1 level dip in Monk (oddly) brings a lot to the table for a Wildshape Druid anyway, so if you're dead set on the Wis to AC bonus, the option is there.

[Ingus]

IMO Monk's belt is not so overpowered.
It is abusable only with Owl's Insight, which is itself a broken spell.

Otherwise, the only good use of Monk's Belt I've seen was with a Mystic Theurge (which, compared to fellow caster, did need a little love, indeed)

[Mystify]

Put Belts of Battle on a party of 4 20th level Monks. See how the party manages the same encounter and tell me the problem is with the item.

Tier 1 is Tier 1 for a reason, and Belts of Battle act as a force multiplier. If your input force is low, then the impact of a Belt of Battle is low. If your input force is extremely high, then the impact of a Belt of Battle is high.

Plus, even then, you're steamrolling one encounter. Big deal. If you're a DM, eschew the 15 minute adventuring day. Keep in mind that your players can nova on one encounter by breaking the action economy, and plan your campaign accordingly.

I put it on a paladin, and exploded everything. We put it on the assassin, and he rained death.

The power of the item increases with your level, unlike every other item in the game. At the time you can first afford it, it is reasonable, but it soon becomes ridiculously cheap.And because it is so cheap, it only costs 18k to stack it on a different belt enchantment, so its not really taking up a slot either.

The price of the item and its power level are completely unrelated, and diverge quickly. Its not balanced at all.

[Tyndmyr]

Belts of battle are really poorly balanced. When a 12k item is still one of the superstar items for a level 20 group, something is off.

I don't know that it is...the problem really is that there's not a lot of items in it's class, so we have little to measure against. A rod of quicken is the only thing that comes to mind as somewhat comparable, but even that really is notably different.

So, when you only have one of a given kind of item, it's going to be the best in class at all levels it's available.

And it's really not that game-breaking unless you allow people to make (ab)use of multiple belts, dropping each one after it's used. I have difficulty imagining one turning a paladin into a class worth playing.

[Gullintanni]

I put it on a paladin, and exploded everything. We put it on the assassin, and he rained death for one or two rounds in one encounter.


A paladin? Really? May I ask what the encounter looked like? Maybe I'm more sadistic than the average DM, but a Paladin that gets to Move and Full-Attack for two turns in a row isn't going to put a dent in what I would consider a well-designed encounter.

Also FTFY.

[Mystify]

I don't know that it is...the problem really is that there's not a lot of items in it's class, so we have little to measure against. A rod of quicken is the only thing that comes to mind as somewhat comparable, but even that really is notably different.

So, when you only have one of a given kind of item, it's going to be the best in class at all levels it's available.

And it's really not that game-breaking unless you allow people to make (ab)use of multiple belts, dropping each one after it's used. I have difficulty imagining one turning a paladin into a class worth playing.

It was an ubercharger on a pegasus. He could destroy everything in a fairly large radius when he charged, and the belt was enough to let him completely repeat the demonstration. The DM was throwing things with a ridiculous CR at us, and they would just explode. And we had a several people with belts of battle, any one of which was capable of swinging battles with its use.

Its not that its the best in class at all levels its available. Its that what it does is inherently powerful in a way that multiplies with character power. It should not be in the system in the first place, at least not without heavy revision. Say, limit it to move actions, and extra attacks that don't stack with haste. That reduces its high level ability to move as a swift, which is much more reasonable.

[Tyndmyr]

I see it being...the pally gets to charge and THEN full attack. So...he does what the uber charger does every round for one round per day.

Meh. My encounters are designed around roughly four turns of everyone getting actions. One extra action in round 1 does shorten the fight a bit, but doesn't crush it.

[Mystify]

A paladin? Really? May I ask what the encounter looked like? Maybe I'm more sadistic than the average DM, but a Paladin that gets to Move and Full-Attack for two turns in a row isn't going to put a dent in what I would consider a well-designed encounter.

Also FTFY.
sorcerer/paladin/cavalier on a pegasus. He could move arounda thousand feet per round on a charge, and do x5 damage on a hit. He quick draws a quicken rod, casts quicken true strike(he has an ACF so he could quicken his sorcerer spells), charges as a standard due to a magic item, power attacks for all he's worth with his lance, then cleaves it through everything within reach, and then continues on past, leaving him a move action to activate the belt and do it again.

[Starbuck_II]

With fullplate you have to burn a feat and it slows your movement, not to mention taking a HUGE bite out of many skills.

There's a reason why even few fighters wear anything but mithral plate.

For 2 (or was it 4 K) you can get a tooth of Savnok so you are never slowed by armor or encumberance.

[Gullintanni]

sorcerer/paladin/cavalier on a pegasus. He could move arounda thousand feet per round on a charge, and do x5 damage on a hit. He quick draws a quicken rod, casts quicken true strike(he has an ACF so he could quicken his sorcerer spells), charges as a standard due to a magic item, power attacks for all he's worth with his lance, then cleaves it through everything within reach, and then continues on past, leaving him a move action to activate the belt and do it again.


I see it being...the pally gets to charge and THEN full attack. So...he does what the uber charger does every round for one round per day.

Meh. My encounters are designed around roughly four turns of everyone getting actions. One extra action in round 1 does shorten the fight a bit, but doesn't crush it.

Basically this...also, like I said, Belt of Battle is a force multiplier. If you take an extremely high-op build (like a sorcadin/ubercharger) and apply a way to break the action economy for a couple of rounds to it, then you get extremely powerful results.

That's not a problem with the belt, but with the mechanics for an Uber-charger. If you combine Broken Build + Belt of Battle you get Broken Results. If you combine average build + Belt of Battle you get above average results.

Again, put 4 Belts of Battle on a party of four 20th Level mid-op monks and see what happens.

[Mystify]

Basically this...also, like I said, Belt of Battle is a force multiplier. If you take an extremely high-op build (like an ubercharger) and apply a way to break the action economy for a couple of rounds to it, then you get extremely powerful results.

That's not a problem with the belt, but with the mechanics for an Uber-charger. If you combine Broken Build + Belt of Battle you get Broken Results. If you combine average build + Belt of Battle you get above average results.

Again, put 4 Belts of Battle on a party of four 20th Level mid-op monks and see what happens.
Its more useful than a 50k set of armour, or 80k for a bigger sword, or pretty much anything else you want to buy. Anything that gives a bigger boost costs several times as much. The power/price ratio becomes increasingly distorted as you level up. nothing else in the game amplifies power like it does. I understand the reasoning why it may be balanced, but like revivify, that does not hold up in practice.

[Tyndmyr]

sorcerer/paladin/cavalier on a pegasus. He could move arounda thousand feet per round on a charge, and do x5 damage on a hit. He quick draws a quicken rod, casts quicken true strike(he has an ACF so he could quicken his sorcerer spells), charges as a standard due to a magic item, power attacks for all he's worth with his lance, then cleaves it through everything within reach, and then continues on past, leaving him a move action to activate the belt and do it again.

So, this still only shortens the fight by a round.

I'm not seeing this crush the fight unless the fight is just a short, easy fight* anyhow.

*Short, easy fight for this level of char optimization. I frequently play at fairly high op levels, and recently had to resort to advanced statistics to resolve a specific warhulks turns. You balance the encounters accordingly.

[Gullintanni]

Its more useful than a 50k set of armour, or 80k for a bigger sword, or pretty much anything else you want to buy. Anything that gives a bigger boost costs several times as much. The power/price ratio becomes increasingly distorted as you level up. nothing else in the game amplifies power like it does. I understand the reasoning why it may be balanced, but like revivify, that does not hold up in practice.

Except that that sword offers a continuous effect, whereas a Belt of Battle offers its benefit once or twice per day, and requires an action to activate. I'm not arguing that the sword offers greater benefit, it just offers continuous benefit, and that tends to carry a premium in D&D. A continuous Belt of Battle, I expect, would come at quite a cost...and therein lies the issue.

Plus, you're probably assuming said sword is offering a beefier enhancement bonus. Grab a pearl of power, get a Greater Magic Weapon cast on your sword, and spend the additional +9 in enhancements on special weapon properties and I can build a pretty useful sword that I get to use in every encounter all day long. In that instance, I'll take the sword over the Belt of Battle.

[Mystify]

So, this still only shortens the fight by a round.

I'm not seeing this crush the fight unless the fight is just a short, easy fight* anyhow.

*Short, easy fight for this level of char optimization. I frequently play at fairly high op levels, and recently had to resort to advanced statistics to resolve a specific warhulks turns. You balance the encounters accordingly.

When that is the difference between 3 enemies getting a turn and 0, that most definitely matters.

The DM basically had to resort to literally endless waves of enemies to keep us challenged.

An the difference between having enough HD on the boss to survive for one round and surviving for 2 is HUGE.

Even at mid-op. an extra full round is huge. That is easily a few hundred damage in the right hands, and that can easily destroy a boss before it can effectively do anything. For instance, what if the character is dual weilding? A highly mobile boss may be able to play keep-away enough to avoid the combat, but with that one item, they can move up, get their full round, and devastate it.

[Mystify]

Except that that sword offers a continuous effect, whereas a Belt of Battle offers its benefit once or twice per day, and requires an action to activate. I'm not arguing that the sword offers greater benefit, it just offers continuous benefit, and that tends to carry a premium in D&D. A continuous Belt of Battle, I expect, would come at quite a cost...and therein lies the issue.

Plus, you're probably assuming said sword is offering a beefier enhancement bonus. Grab a pearl of power, get a Greater Magic Weapon cast on your sword, and spend the additional +9 in enhancements on special weapon properties and I can build a pretty useful sword that I get to use in every encounter all day long. In that instance, I'll take the sword over the Belt of Battle.

and the difference betwen a +9 and a +10 sword is 38k. I would still rather have a belt of battle, and plenty of extra cash, than a single +1 on top of that.
There are plenty of expansive, awesome high level items I would have to choose between. And I will pick the belt of battle first, every time. even if it cost 100k I would pick that up at level 20, because it is that useful for a level 20. Due its power scaling with level, no matter its price, there will be a point where it is worthwhile. Well, until you realize that at epic levels , wizards can cast 5 time stops in a round, which renders its effect on the action economy moot.
But If an item exerts a multiplicative force of the player, it is inherently problematic.

[Gullintanni]

When that is the difference between 3 enemies getting a turn and 0, that most definitely matters.

The DM basically had to resort to literally endless waves of enemies to keep us challenged.


Endless waves? A Belt of Battle has three charges. A move action consumes one, a standard action consumes two, and a full-round action consumes three. That's 12 charges among four people.

How, pray tell, are you managing endless waves of enemies with only 12 charges? This story doesn't add up. If I put you in a situation where you need to use your charges to survive, and then you win your encounter using your Belts, and then throw you into another encounter 10 minutes later where you need to use your charges to survive, guess what? No Belts of Battle. Deal with it.

That's the point of encounters. They're supposed to consume resources. If you're letting the party re-charge between encounters, that's the DMs fault. Belts of Battle are limited use items. Force your party into an attrition battle, and the Belts become much less OP.

In terms of items and multiplicative force and players being problematic, I don't see why multiplicative force in very short unsustainable bursts a few times a day is a big deal.

[Tyndmyr]

When that is the difference between 3 enemies getting a turn and 0, that most definitely matters.

The DM basically had to resort to literally endless waves of enemies to keep us challenged.

An the difference between having enough HD on the boss to survive for one round and surviving for 2 is HUGE.

Design the bosses to be more resilient. If you're designing a two round fight, then a surprise round and a good init roll still means he doesn't get to act. If you design a four round fight, then circumstances that shorten the fight by a round result in a pretty decent fight still.


Even at mid-op. an extra full round is huge. That is easily a few hundred damage in the right hands, and that can easily destroy a boss before it can effectively do anything. For instance, what if the character is dual weilding?

If the char wishes to gimp himself, I suppose he can. I don't see why that matters, though.

And a few hundred damage is not that notable.


A highly mobile boss may be able to play keep-away enough to avoid the combat, but with that one item, they can move up, get their full round, and devastate it.

As optimization and levels get higher, mere mobility is insufficient for encounter design, and ablative defenses are increasingly necessary. Anything that is going to drop to a full attack is not going to last long in any case.

I'm not seeing belt of battle as the primary problem here.

[Mystify]

Design the bosses to be more resilient. If you're designing a two round fight, then a surprise round and a good init roll still means he doesn't get to act. If you design a four round fight, then circumstances that shorten the fight by a round result in a pretty decent fight still.



If the char wishes to gimp himself, I suppose he can. I don't see why that matters, though.

And a few hundred damage is not that notable.



As optimization and levels get higher, mere mobility is insufficient for encounter design, and ablative defenses are increasingly necessary. Anything that is going to drop to a full attack is not going to last long in any case.

I'm not seeing belt of battle as the primary problem here.
Its not the only problem, no ,but it amplifis all the problems. I have never seen a high level campaign that could pull off a long encounter. I beleive the term used in rocket tag. Damage far outstrips health.

The last campaign I ran I ended wit ha boss that I arbitrarily gave 500,000hp. It only took 5 rounds to kill him.

At those levels, battles swing extremely quickly. Being able to take out another enemy or batch of enemies before their turn means that much firepower that is not being turned on you. And these enemies could, in turn, destroy us in a single round.

I'm not saying that belt of battle alone broke the campaign. But when every 20th level character goes "ooh, must have" for a 12k item, something is wrong. We should go ooh at 90k items, not 12k.

[Douglas]

sorcerer/paladin/cavalier on a pegasus. He could move arounda thousand feet per round on a charge, and do x5 damage on a hit. He quick draws a quicken rod, casts quicken true strike(he has an ACF so he could quicken his sorcerer spells), charges as a standard due to a magic item, power attacks for all he's worth with his lance, then cleaves it through everything within reach, and then continues on past, leaving him a move action to activate the belt and do it again.
That doesn't work. The belt is activated by a swift action, not a move action, and you can't (without a house rule) convert a move action into a swift action. Additionally, activating the belt does not grant a swift action no matter which option you pick, so even if you could activate it with a move action you still wouldn't be able to repeat the Quickened True Strike for the second charge. The 3-charge activation gives "a full round action", not "one round's worth of actions". If you use Quickened True Strike, you can't use the belt at all. If you use the belt, you can charge twice but neither charge has True Strike.

Ever since swift actions were introduced, the balancing of mechanics has relied extensively on the fact that acquiring multiple swift actions per round is extremely difficult, even if you have actions of other types available to spend. The lack of move->swift or standard->swift action conversion is an intentional balancing factor.

Additionally, the text of True Strike and Cleave directly contradict each other on whether the extra +20 applies to the Cleave attack and there is no clear indication of which one takes precedence, so RAW is unclear on whether that combination works at all. In the lack of clear RAW, the fallback of WotC opinion as expressed in the official FAQ (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a) clearly states that it doesn't work - the intent of Cleave's statement is merely that the free attack does not take an iterative penalty beyond whatever the original attack already had.

To make a long explanation short: this entire combo just doesn't work.

[Tyndmyr]

Its not the only problem, no ,but it amplifis all the problems. I have never seen a high level campaign that could pull off a long encounter. I beleive the term used in rocket tag. Damage far outstrips health.

The last campaign I ran I ended wit ha boss that I arbitrarily gave 500,000hp. It only took 5 rounds to kill him.

At those levels, battles swing extremely quickly. Being able to take out another enemy or batch of enemies before their turn means that much firepower that is not being turned on you. And these enemies could, in turn, destroy us in a single round.

I'm not saying that belt of battle alone broke the campaign. But when every 20th level character goes "ooh, must have" for a 12k item, something is wrong. We should go ooh at 90k items, not 12k.

Were you frequently only doing a single encounter in a day? When your average day is a single encounter balanced for about two rounds, then yes, BoB outstrips anything else. It's an ideal situation for it.

And arbitrarily adding gobs of hp is not really the same thing as ablative defenses. You want things like Wings of Cover, mirror images, and the luck feat that avoids death 1/day. Also, gobs of immunities and minions. A pure hp grind, in addition to being extremely bypassable, does not make for a notably tactical fight.

Long encounters are quite possible in high level/op campaigns, they just require a great deal more prep work.


That doesn't work. The belt is activated by a swift action, not a move action, and you can't (without a house rule) convert a move action into a swift action. Additionally, activating the belt does not grant a swift action no matter which option you pick, so even if you could activate it with a move action you still wouldn't be able to repeat the Quickened True Strike for the second charge. The 3-charge activation gives "a full round action", not "one round's worth of actions". If you use Quickened True Strike, you can't use the belt at all. If you use the belt, you can charge twice but neither charge has True Strike.

This is also true...I allow the full round action as a full round of actions(the lenient interpretation), but even so, that gives you only one true striked charge and one normal one.

[Greenish]

With fullplate you have to burn a feat and it slows your movement, not to mention taking a HUGE bite out of many skills.Maybe for the poor people fighting in their original forms.

None of those are a problem for a druid with +1 Wild (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicArmor.htm#wild) full plate, though.

[Douglas]

This is also true...I allow the full round action as a full round of actions(the lenient interpretation), but even so, that gives you only one true striked charge and one normal one.
That's not a "lenient interpretation", it's an unambiguous house rule. "Full round action" is a clear, precise, well defined game term, and one of those and nothing else is exactly what the RAW of the Belt of Battle gives you for 3 charges. You are free to house rule differently, but it is a house rule, not an interpretation of ambiguous wording.

[Gullintanni]

Would I be out of my mind to suggest that we move the Belt of Battle discussion to its own thread? We've clearly hi-jacked this thread badly enough :smalltongue:

[Tyndmyr]

That's not a "lenient interpretation", it's an unambiguous house rule. "Full round action" is a clear, precise, well defined game term, and one of those and nothing else is exactly what the RAW of the Belt of Battle gives you for 3 charges. You are free to house rule differently, but it is a house rule, not an interpretation of ambiguous wording.

The description of a full round action is such that equating it with a round of actions is not entirely unreasonable. However, yes, doing this is not something a DM is required to do by the rules, and if being free with actions breaks your game...blaming the belt for this is a bit harsh. As I originally stated, the pally could easily use the belt to pull of a charge and a full attack, which is nice, but hardly game breaking.

[Mystify]

Were you frequently only doing a single encounter in a day? When your average day is a single encounter balanced for about two rounds, then yes, BoB outstrips anything else. It's an ideal situation for it.

And arbitrarily adding gobs of hp is not really the same thing as ablative defenses. You want things like Wings of Cover, mirror images, and the luck feat that avoids death 1/day. Also, gobs of immunities and minions. A pure hp grind, in addition to being extremely bypassable, does not make for a notably tactical fight.

Long encounters are quite possible in high level/op campaigns, they just require a great deal more prep work.





This is also true...I allow the full round action as a full round of actions(the lenient interpretation), but even so, that gives you only one true striked charge and one normal one.
The assassin didn't rely on any questionable tricks like that and would still murderize everything.

Lets see- wings of air may cause problems for a single-strike uberscharger, but he could still do a full-round charge instead if needed, and it wouldn't phase the assassin. Mirror image is useless with all the true seeing flying around. The DM tried lots of things to challenge us, it never worked. The most effective thing was a scarab of invulnerability just to ensure the boss would survive 1 round.

But ANYTHING that messes with the action economy is extremely powerful. That is just how the system works. The item is dirt cheap for what it gives you. You get a damage dealer into position on the boss, and poof, no more boss. For casters, it is ac heap quicken that works at any spell slot. A greater quicken rod costs 170,000, and for good reason. Thats 56k per quickened spell. This item costs 12k, less than 1/4 the price. A lesser rod costs 25k per charge, still 1/2 the price. It is pretty much on par for a least quicken rod, so its priced for the value of a 3rd level spell. Even then, thats only 2 of the charges, leaving a spare charge to give the caster an extra move action, which can be extremely useful. So even using part of its power, it is extremely cheap. And spellcasters don't have much competition for the belt slot.

[Mystify]

Maybe for the poor people fighting in their original forms.

None of those are a problem for a druid with +1 Wild (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicArmor.htm#wild) full plate, though.

Even with +1 beasthide, you are likely going to be in a faster form, so even after a speed decrease you are still fast. A fleshraker in beasthide dragonscale fullplate is a powerful force indeed.

Though admittedly that was in a gestalt game, so I got a proficiency from fight and didn't need to spend a feat on it. Its hard to argue with the results.

However, the weak point of that character was definitely the touch AC, and multiclassing in some monk, in hindsight, would have been very effective. or wearing a monks belt, whichever.

[Tyndmyr]

The assassin didn't rely on any questionable tricks like that and would still murderize everything.

Now, I'm curious how that works...assassins are all well and good, but I haven't seen them as especially broken with an extra action.




Wings of cover basically allows negation of one attack per round. In the case of a pouncing ubercharger(or a charge/full attack), it's going to take out the best attack, and in the paladins case, it would mean no charge bonuses on his full attack. It literally changes his entire action to just a bog standard full attack since the true striked charge goes away.

Minions can block charges. Mirror image is vulnerable to true seeing, yes. Blink is not. Requiring True Seeing to play effectively means less money for other toys.

[quote]But ANYTHING that messes with the action economy is extremely powerful. That is just how the system works. The item is dirt cheap for what it gives you. You get a damage dealer into position on the boss, and poof, no more boss. For casters, it is ac heap quicken that works at any spell slot. A greater quicken rod costs 170,000, and for good reason. Thats 56k per quickened spell. This item costs 12k, less than 1/4 the price. A lesser rod costs 25k per charge, still 1/2 the price. It is pretty much on par for a least quicken rod, so its priced for the value of a 3rd level spell. Even then, thats only 2 of the charges, leaving a spare charge to give the caster an extra move action, which can be extremely useful. So even using part of its power, it is extremely cheap. And spellcasters don't have much competition for the belt slot.

A rod of quicken is a lot better, though. Even after factoring out for the charges, it means two ninth level spells in a turn, and it can be quick drawn then dropped. It's not hogging a slot the way a belt of battle is. Slot hogging 1/day items NEED to be better. You get the same result 1/3rd as often, and you expended a slot on it.

The spare slot for an extra move action is...meh. Extra move actions aren't the important part, the standard action is. Move actions on spellcasters are wasted half the time anyhow.
L

[Gullintanni]

A rod of quicken is a lot better, though. Even after factoring out for the charges, it means two ninth level spells in a turn, and it can be quick drawn then dropped. It's not hogging a slot the way a belt of battle is. Slot hogging 1/day items NEED to be better. You get the same result 1/3rd as often, and you expended a slot on it.

The spare slot for an extra move action is...meh. Extra move actions aren't the important part, the standard action is. Move actions on spellcasters are wasted half the time anyhow.
L

I also want to point out that a Rod of Quicken has no activation cost vs. a BoB which has a swift action activation cost in an action economy that's often already starved for swift actions.

[Hirax]

Which is why you persist shapechange and be a chronotyryn. :smallbiggrin:

[Mystify]

I also want to point out that a Rod of Quicken has no activation cost vs. a BoB which has a swift action activation cost in an action economy that's often already starved for swift actions.

the rod of quicken doesn't have an activation cost, but the quickened spell still takes up the swift action. And since its not really a quickened spell, you can use a metamagic rod with it as well. Yeah, it lets you cast a quickened maximized time stop(as one potential, suboptimal example). Its not only cheaper than a rod, it stacks with the rod. And with some item crafting, the 18k to put the belt of battle effect on a different belt is trivial.esp since that really costs 9k now.
Metamagic rods are expensive and have those limitations for a reason. This belt is very cheap and powerful.

[Gullintanni]

It's really only as powerful as you are. Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, the BoB is one of the more balanced items in the game. It's what every limited use item should strive to be IMHO.

It's a use-activated, once per day item that grants a legitimately useful ability across all levels for all classes that doesn't break the game and is never a waste of gold. That's all the balance I need in an item, and if there's nothing better to spend my WBL on, then it's what I'll buy. That being said, I'll still take the +1 Sword w/ +9 Special Enhancements on it first, because like I said, that item is useful all day long, doesn't have an activation cost and will probably end up doing a lot more work for me than the BoB.

Different opinions I guess.

[Mystify]

It's really only as powerful as you are. Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, the BoB is one of the more balanced items in the game. It's what every limited use item should strive to be IMHO.

It's a use-activated, once per day item that grants a legitimately useful ability across all levels for all classes that doesn't break the game and is never a waste of gold. That's all the balance I need in an item, and if there's nothing better to spend my WBL on, then it's what I'll buy. That being said, I'll still take the +1 Sword w/ +9 Special Enhancements on it first, because like I said, that item is useful all day long, doesn't have an activation cost and will probably end up doing a lot more work for me than the BoB.

Different opinions I guess.
And when the wizard is incentively to buy it as soon as possible because it is so much cheaper than the normal option for one his most powerful abilities, there is no problem?

[Gullintanni]

And when the wizard is incentively to buy it as soon as possible because it is so much cheaper than the normal option for one his most powerful abilities, there is no problem?

Absolutely none, as the wizard gets to use this item once per day. Most other options a Wizard has for manipulating the action economy are much more frequently abuseable.

[Mystify]

Absolutely none, as the wizard gets to use this item once per day. Most other options a Wizard has for manipulating the action economy are much more frequently abuseable.

Ok, and a greater quicken rode is useable 3 times per day, and costs 14x as much. How is that NOT a unreasonably strong incentive to get that item first? Esp. since you can stack it with other metamagic rods, making it clearly better?

Plus, it works with sorcerers too, and they can't quicken normally.

It is objectively and qualifiedly dirt cheap. The item does more, and does it better, at a fraction of the price. How can you argue that it is balanced?

[Hirax]

Ok, and a greater quicken rode is useable 3 times per day, and costs 14x as much. How is that NOT a unreasonably strong incentive to get that item first? Esp. since you can stack it with other metamagic rods, making it clearly better?

Plus, it works with sorcerers too, and they can't quicken normally.

It is objectively and qualifiedly dirt cheap. The item does more, and does it better, at a fraction of the price. How can you argue that it is balanced?

I think you've done more to say that rods are overpriced than to say that a BoB is too powerful.

[Mystify]

I think you've done more to say that rods are overpriced than to say that a BoB is too powerful.

No, the rods are extremely powerful and well worth their cost. They are effectively giving the wizard access to 13th level spells. If you think that needs to be any cheaper, then you are seriously confused about something.

[Tyndmyr]

Yeah, this sounds a lot more like "rods are overpriced".

That said, you would need a VERY permissive DM to allow you to just swap out belts and use them repeatedly. So, you're still dismissing the magic item slot cost.

Rods, on the other hand, have no such limitations, and can be swapped out at will. And yes, of COURSE rod + belt is better than the rod alone. It's better than the belt alone too. That's what synergy is.


No, the rods are extremely powerful and well worth their cost. They are effectively giving the wizard access to 13th level spells. If you think that needs to be any cheaper, then you are seriously confused about something.

No...it doesn't. It is something vastly more limited. Metamagics are, without reducers, rarely worth using. The ability to apply a specific metamagic a limited number of times per day is nothing like "you get 13th level spells".

[Coidzor]

Aren't rods generally agreed to be fairly overpriced?


I never said the devs didn't plan for it to be used by others but it's meant to be used by monks thematically and when other classes get more use out of it, it irks me. Hence no Wis bonus, problem solved. It's not like divine casters need any more love. :smalltongue:

You realize that's mostly just because the Monk class is MAD and poorly made rather than anything the wisdom-based SAD caster is doing, right?


A 1 level dip in Monk (oddly) brings a lot to the table for a Wildshape Druid anyway, so if you're dead set on the Wis to AC bonus, the option is there.

It sets a caster level on fire and delays getting more, better wildshaping abilities and spells and animal companion progression. :smallconfused:

The entire appeal of the monk's belt is that it's an easily picked up, relatively inexpensive item that synergizes well with them and doesn't require setting their druidness on fire. It's more that it's really convenient to grab than that it's a powerful thing for them.

[Mystify]

Yeah, this sounds a lot more like "rods are overpriced".

That said, you would need a VERY permissive DM to allow you to just swap out belts and use them repeatedly. So, you're still dismissing the magic item slot cost.

Rods, on the other hand, have no such limitations, and can be swapped out at will. And yes, of COURSE rod + belt is better than the rod alone. It's better than the belt alone too. That's what synergy is.

So you think getting one use an ability at 1/4th the price of all subsequent uses is balanced :smallconfused:

Most caster's I see use rods continuously. They are worth taking craft:rod for, just so you can get more of them. Saying that rods are overpriced is claiming that caster's are too weak and need a boost. Literally, that is what that claim means.

The belt also distinctly increases a caster's ability to go nova, which is problematic. The ability to go nova is already a major problem when trying to set up balance.

[Hirax]

Saying that rods are overpriced is claiming that caster's are too weak and need a boost. Literally, that is what that claim means.


Or it means that there are more efficient uses for the GP. :sigh:

[Coidzor]

Saying that rods are overpriced is claiming that caster's are too weak and need a boost. Literally, that is what that claim means.

...No, especially for the rather bad rods, one can be capable of observing that it is overpriced for the effect it gives without crying that wizards can't have nice things.

Refusing to see that as a possibility is just bizarre.

[Gullintanni]

I think you've done more to say that rods are overpriced than to say that a BoB is too powerful.

Basically this.

Let's look at what else you can buy in and around the same price band:

Harmonizing Crystal Echoblade, 12,000 Gold and change: This allows you to maintain a bard song for 10 rounds after you stop concentration, saving you precious feats that you'd otherwise need to accomplish the same, and allows to add half your bard level as sonic damage on all attacks.

Rod of Defiance, 13,000 Gold: Acts as a +2 Mace and lowers undead turn resistance for all undead within 30 feet by 4. This means that my cleric is effectively 8 levels higher for the purposes of turning, and eliminates undead almost entirely as an effective monster category.

Nightstick, 7,500 Gold: For the price of a Belt of Battle, I'm pretty close to getting two of these. Adds turn attempts. Fuels Divine Feats. Enough said.

Headband of Intellect +4, 16,000 Gold: Adds a bonus 2nd level and 3rd level spell, increases my save DCs by 2. Slightly more expensive than a BoB, but this is my first priority over the BoB for sure.

Belt, Monk's, 13,000 Gold: Add WIS +1 to AC, unarmed damage as 5th level monk.

All of these items, I would argue, are higher priority than a Belt of Battle within their niche. Why? Because nothing, barring obvious things like wishes and permanent effects, are particularly broken if they're only doable one round per day.



The entire appeal of the monk's belt is that it's an easily picked up, relatively inexpensive item that synergizes well with them and doesn't require setting their druidness on fire. It's more that it's really convenient to grab than that it's a powerful thing for them.

Yeah but you can, with ACFs pick up some useful bonus feats, including the always useful for a Druid IUS, Wis to AC, unarmed strike damage (not worth that much IMHO)...I agree that in an arena where a Monk's belt is on the table, you're better off going that way, but if it's off the table, then Druid 19/Monk 1 is entirely serviceable. Losing 1 level of Druid isn't particularly painful.

[Tyndmyr]

So you think getting one use an ability at 1/4th the price of all subsequent uses is balanced :smallconfused:

Most caster's I see use rods continuously. They are worth taking craft:rod for, just so you can get more of them. Saying that rods are overpriced is claiming that caster's are too weak and need a boost. Literally, that is what that claim means.

The belt also distinctly increases a caster's ability to go nova, which is problematic. The ability to go nova is already a major problem when trying to set up balance.

That seems...odd. This is not the same as what I see, at all. Some of them make use of specific rods(a lesser rod of extend seems popular). It is far from universal. A handy haversack is vastly more universal. Are those underpriced?

Saying that an item is priced wrong is entirely different from claiming casters are weak and need a boost.

The belt increases ANYONES ability to nova. It works for absolutely any class.

And yes, it's harsh limitation on how often you can use it does matter immensely. A char that uses 1/day item in all his magic item slots tends to be...very poor when not novaing. And, in most campaigns, you can't be assured you'll only fight 1/day.

It's the EXACT same reason that the swift megamagics are considered weak feats.

[Mystify]

No...it doesn't. It is something vastly more limited. Metamagics are, without reducers, rarely worth using. The ability to apply a specific metamagic a limited number of times per day is nothing like "you get 13th level spells".
Metamagic without reductions is reasonably fair and balanced. Its not worth doing because the tradeoffs are well designed. Metamagic with reductions is one of the fastest way to see a caster explode into amazing power. Its why incantrix is a +2 class, and recaster is a +1 despite losing a casting level.

People often complain that a single 9th level spell is enough to win an encounter. Now you are letting them cast 2 at the same time, you better believe that is worth the cost.

Quicken is a large part of a wizards power, because it is how he laughs at the action economy.

You have some very strange ideas about spellcaster's power.

[Coidzor]

Its not worth doing because the tradeoffs are well designed.

If the trade-offs make it so that something is never worth doing, then, no, it is not well designed, it is, in fact, poorly designed. If it gave a benefit such that the trade-offs would cause one to consider the use of the ability and use it in certain situations and not in others, that is much, much closer to good design than your example.

:smallconfused::smallannoyed:


You have some very strange ideas about spellcaster's power.

:smallamused:

[Hirax]

Metamagic without reductions is reasonably fair and balanced. Its not worth doing because the tradeoffs are well designed. Metamagic with reductions is one of the fastest way to see a caster explode into amazing power. Its why incantrix is a +2 class, and recaster is a +1 despite losing a casting level.

People often complain that a single 9th level spell is enough to win an encounter. Now you are letting them cast 2 at the same time, you better believe that is worth the cost.

Quicken is a large part of a wizards power, because it is how he laughs at the action economy.

You have some very strange ideas about spellcaster's power.

If anyone wants to break the action economy, it's as simple as shapechanging into a chronotyryn all day, which lets you cast 2 9ths in a round if you want, among other great benefits. I'd rather put 170k GP toward other magic items, such as a vest of the archmagi, ring of spell battle, ring of arcane might, bead of karma, amulet of second chances, and even a greater empower, extend, or maximize rod, which are all more efficient than quicken rods.

[Mystify]

Basically this.

Let's look at what else you can buy in and around the same price band:

Harmonizing Crystal Echoblade, 12,000 Gold and change: This allows you to maintain a bard song for 10 rounds after you stop concentration, saving you precious feats that you'd otherwise need to accomplish the same, and allows to add half your bard level as sonic damage on all attacks.

Rod of Defiance, 13,000 Gold: Acts as a +2 Mace and lowers undead turn resistance for all undead within 30 feet by 4. This means that my cleric is effectively 8 levels higher for the purposes of turning, and eliminates as an entire monster category.

Nightstick, 7,500 Gold: For the price of a Belt of Battle, I'm pretty close to getting two of these. Adds turn attempts. Fuels Divine Feats. Enough said.

Headband of Intellect +4, 16,000 Gold: Adds a bonus 2nd level and 3rd level spell, increases my save DCs by 2. Slightly more expensive than a BoB, but this is my first priority over the BoB for sure.

Belt, Monk's, 13,000 Gold: Add WIS +1 to AC, unarmed damage as 5th level monk.

All of these items, I would argue, are higher priority than a Belt of Battle within their niche. Why? Because nothing, barring obvious things like wishes and permanent effects, are particularly broken if they're only doable one round per day.



Yeah but you can, with ACFs pick up some useful bonus feats, including the always useful for a Druid IUS, Wis to AC, unarmed strike damage (not worth that much IMHO)...I agree that in an arena where a Monk's belt is on the table, you're better off going that way, but if it's off the table, then Druid 19/Monk 1 is entirely serviceable. Losing 1 level of Druid isn't particularly painful.
nightsticks are broken, because they fuel divine feats. I have to put some serious limits on them to prevent abuse, esp. in the realm of turning them into quicken spells.

When you can nuke through an enconter in 1 round, it does not take that many 1/day items that you have enough 1/days to do every encounter. A per/day limit is not that steep. Its not like you routinely fight 10 million orcs every day. And unless the campaign is being forced into long streams of battles, they don't always occur naturally.

Every caster I see at high levels quickens a spell every round, by whatever means he can. If its a 5th level spell elevated to 9th, or a 9th with a rod, they have to cast as fast as they can to keep up with the action economy.

Maybe, if the campaign is rule ideally and you can naturally get 15 battles in every day things will magically fall into place. However, can you honeslty say that you never end up with the party executing a precision strike on the enemy, at the timing of their own choosing, able to teleport in, go nova, and leave? That you can always keep them from casting one of the 12 "lets rest for the night safely in the middle of nowhere" spells, and recouping everything when they start to run dry? It is not a natural flow to get a dozen combats in a row, and expecting that is unrealistic.

[Gullintanni]

extend.

All of your post is correct, but I want to single this out in particular. One of the more effective ways to abuse the action economy is to court it outside of combat. Extend goes a long way toward this. Mind-Blank + Extend lasts for 48 hours. That's an 8th level spell slot I need to use precisely once every two days.

An Extended Chained Greater Magic Weapon will absolutely wreak havoc on the whole WBL dynamic and last 40 hours at CL 20, allowing you to have effectively +14 weapons at level 20 all the time. To achieve the same thing with monetary wealth would require millions of gold. Even if a Belt of Battle cost 200,000 gold, the savings you make with the GMW chain above would buy you 10 of them.

Creative wizards and casters in general do not need a Belt of Battle to break the game. Compared to the kind of shenanigans described above, it actually seems like kind of a weak option, and the only reason to really take it at all is because it's so cheap.



When you can nuke through an enconter in 1 round, it does not take that many 1/day items that you have enough 1/days to do every encounter. A per/day limit is not that steep. Its not like you routinely fight 10 million orcs every day. And unless the campaign is being forced into long streams of battles, they don't always occur naturally.

Maybe, if the campaign is rule ideally and you can naturally get 15 battles in every day things will magically fall into place. However, can you honeslty say that you never end up with the party executing a precision strike on the enemy, at the timing of their own choosing, able to teleport in, go nova, and leave? That you can always keep them from casting one of the 12 "lets rest for the night safely in the middle of nowhere" spells, and recouping everything when they start to run dry? It is not a natural flow to get a dozen combats in a row, and expecting that is unrealistic.

Snipped for relevance.

If you buy 10 belts of battle, then how are you getting around the action cost of switching them in combat? Let's evaluate: You activate your belt spend your extra actions and now it's empty. You now must take off the belt (a move action), shuffle around in your pack for the next belt (a move action) and put on the new belt (another move action). If your enemy hasn't killed you by this point, then the DM isn't doing his job.

And on the second note...if the DM is letting the party fight every battle in the game on their terms, then the problem you're experiencing is not the result of a Belt of Battle.

[Coidzor]

Maybe, if the campaign is rule ideally and you can naturally get 15 battles in every day things will magically fall into place.

You... don't know how many encounters one is generally expected to run into a day or per level? :smallconfused: 13.3-ish is the number of equal EL to EPL encounters to level up.

And you've actually reminded me that I can't quite recall the expected number, but I think it's between 4 and 6 encounters a day.

[Gullintanni]

You... don't know how many encounters one is generally expected to run into a day or per level? :smallconfused: 13.3-ish is the number of equal EL to EPL encounters to level up.

And you've actually reminded me that I can't quite recall the expected number, but I think it's between 4 and 6 encounters a day.

4-6 is about right. An equal CR encounter is supposed to consume 20% of the party resources. Assuming the CR system worked as promised, that'd mean that by encounter number 5, you'd be fighting for your lives.

[Mystify]

If the trade-offs make it so that something is never worth doing, then, no, it is not well designed, it is, in fact, poorly designed. If it gave a benefit such that the trade-offs would cause one to consider the use of the ability and use it in certain situations and not in others, that is much, much closer to good design than your example.

:smallconfused::smallannoyed:

I mistyped that. I meant that its never the clearly superior choice. If it was always better to cast an empowered spell, why do anything else?

If anything, wizard items are too cheap. The class would be extremely powerful if they sat in a room with no items. Them getting piles of extra spell slots and metamagic items just heightens their power needlessly.

So, lets say I take craft rod. It is now 85k for a greater quicken rod.
I have 12 base 7+ level spells per day, and 5 more from my +12 int mod. so 3 rods will let me cast half of my high level spells as quick actions. It costs me 255 to make, now I can stand around casting 7+ spells 2 per round till I run out of them. Is 255k too expensive to completly mock the action economy? No, that is rather cheap for such a tremendous benefit.

[Mystify]

4-6 is about right. An equal CR encounter is supposed to consume 20% of the party resources. Assuming the CR system worked as promised, that'd mean that by encounter number 5, you'd be fighting for your lives.

Ty 3 or 4 cl+20 encounters.
No exaggeration.

[Gullintanni]

Ty 3 or 4 cl+20 encounters.
No exaggeration.

If your pre-epic party is fighting and winning against CR 40 creatures, you're not playing your CR 40 creatures competently; or, your party is approaching the absolute heights of practical optimization, in which case, the problem STILL isn't the Belt of Battle.

[Mystify]

If your pre-epic party is fighting and winning against CR 40 creatures, you're not playing your CR 40 creatures competently; or, your party is approaching the absolute heights of practical optimization, in which case, the problem STILL isn't the Belt of Battle.

we were in the low-mid 20s at that point.
Actually, if any one thing was the issue it was revivify. We had a pair of casters able to quicken /reach it easily, and stand up people after they get killed with minimal effort. 1000gp is a meaningless price for death at that level. They kill use, we kill them, its all very bloody. Only we keep standing up.

[Tyndmyr]

Metamagic without reductions is reasonably fair and balanced. Its not worth doing because the tradeoffs are well designed. Metamagic with reductions is one of the fastest way to see a caster explode into amazing power. Its why incantrix is a +2 class, and recaster is a +1 despite losing a casting level.

That's not logical. A tradeoff that is well designed is one that is worth doing, but that is competitive with other options.

Maximizing a second level spell is basically terrible compared to a fifth level spell, though, and it also eats a feat. It's not worth doing because it's NOT well balanced.

Reducers, if stacked and abused enough, can do many things, but the metamagic reducing class capstone of incantatrix is actually not that big of a deal. The earlier one that allows you to spellcraft a metamagic(specifically, persist) onto an existing spell is the crazy one. I know, I played an incantatrix/Iot7v. He wasn't awesome because of his belt of battle(which he also had, and which was trivial), he was awesome because he could maintain 3-5 buffs on every single party member indefinitely, and because he had almost an infinite list of "no, you can't do that" options.


People often complain that a single 9th level spell is enough to win an encounter. Now you are letting them cast 2 at the same time, you better believe that is worth the cost.

You're looking at the extreme high level in exclusion. A scroll of quickened (spell) does the same thing, but with different limitations. Note that even 9th level scrolls are rather a lot cheaper than a belt of battle, and don't expend a precious spell slot.

As a rather more dramatic example, the most undercosted action economy booster is Leadership. For the price of a feat, you get a second char(even disregarding followers).


Quicken is a large part of a wizards power, because it is how he laughs at the action economy.

You have some very strange ideas about spellcaster's power.

Action economy is only important after your actions are awesome. Nobody cares if the commoner has double actions. Wizard is a higher tier than Factotum, which has built in massive action economy abuse.

In short, you're dramatically overvaluing action economy. It's situationally very useful, yes, and needs to be taken into account, but it's not the driving force behind casters being at the power level they're at. The spells are.

[Hirax]

I mistyped that. I meant that its never the clearly superior choice. If it was always better to cast an empowered spell, why do anything else?

If anything, wizard items are too cheap. The class would be extremely powerful if they sat in a room with no items. Them getting piles of extra spell slots and metamagic items just heightens their power needlessly.

So, lets say I take craft rod. It is now 85k for a greater quicken rod.
I have 12 base 7+ level spells per day, and 5 more from my +12 int mod. so 3 rods will let me cast half of my high level spells as quick actions. It costs me 255 to make, now I can stand around casting 7+ spells 2 per round till I run out of them. Is 255k too expensive to completly mock the action economy? No, that is rather cheap for such a tremendous benefit.

I would rather have a 2 greater extend rods and vest of the archmagi for 249k - and that's market price, if you want to craft them it's even cheaper. The greater extend rod allows me to have foresight and shapechange cast for 8 hours with minimal CL boosting (which all wizards want for buffs anyway), and the vest of the archmagi allows me to recast each with its pearl of power like ability, for a total of 16 hours of foresight and shapechange, which when you factor the need to rest, means all day.

Shapechange allows me to replicate the effects of a quicken rod because as a chronotyryn I get 2 creatures worth of actions every turn (2 swift, 2 standard, 2 move). On top of all day foresight and shapechange, I get several other goodies from the 2 rods and vest, like +5 resistance to saves, +8 armor bonus, another pearl of power ability that can be used on a spell of any level, +2 to overcome SR, and additional uses of the extend rods to extend 24 hour buffs such as mind blank, energy immunity, and anticipate teleport. If you're hitting CL 24 (which is easy), you can also extend hours per level buffs for 48 hour durations. Or you can pick another 10 minutes per level buff such as veil of undeath to have active for 16 hours a day, which would each up all the uses of both extend rods and all the pearl of power abilities from your vest.

For crazy fun, if you were wizard5/incantatrix4/mindbender1/swiftblade9/olin gisir1 you wouldn't even need the extend rods for shapechange and foresight, and could perhaps afford a greater quicken rod, in which case they'd be able to cast 5 9th level spells in a round. :smallbiggrin: It probably isn't efficient to use that many 9ths in an encounter, and sure, planar shepherds and beholder mages can still break things more. But hey, pew pew pew!

[Mystify]

Oh, I'm sorry, the level of cheese you an pull with a few quicken rods is nothing compared to the abuse a chronotryn is a capabele of, so clearly they are overpriced. Lets toss them out like candy instead. Its not the most broken thing present in the system, so it must be too expensive. :smallamused:

just because an item doesn't bring the entire system crashing down around it's ears doesn't mean its not overpowered/underpriced.

[Hirax]

Oh, I'm sorry, the level of cheese you an pull with a few quicken rods is nothing compared to the abuse a chronotryn is a capabele of, so clearly they are overpriced. Lets toss them out like candy instead. Its not the most broken thing present in the system, so it must be too expensive. :smallamused:

just because an item doesn't bring the entire system crashing down around it's ears doesn't mean its not overpowered/underpriced.

Ok, be a choker instead. Swap the archmage vest out for a couple 9th level pearls of power. Even in core only, greater quicken rods are an inferior option.

[Mystify]

Ok, be a choker instead. Swap the archmage vest out for a couple 9th level pearls of power. Even in core only, greater quicken rods are an inferior option.

Again, just because something else is more broken does not mean that the other option is too weak.

[Hirax]

Nobody has said it's weak, only that it's not cost effective. Which it isn't.

[Gullintanni]

Ok, be a choker instead. Swap the archmage vest out for a couple 9th level pearls of power. Even in core only, greater quicken rods are an inferior option.

Expanding on this...3 Scrolls of Shapechange cost just under $12K and allow you to transform into a Choker. Minimum CL on a Shapechange scroll is 17 for a 9th level spell. So now, you've got 51 rounds of action economy abuse at your disposal. And it doesn't eat up your swift actions every time you do it.

Granted, this method only works for you three times. Still in those three instances, you do a MUCH better job breaking the action economy than you do with a Belt of Battle. A Choker can make two standard actions in a round plus a swift action, so if they want to they can toss out three spells per round. And still be wizards.

A Rod of Greater Quicken costs $170K. That's enough money to buy 44 scrolls of Shapechange. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say given a choice between the two, I'd take the scrolls.

[Tyndmyr]

we were in the low-mid 20s at that point.
Actually, if any one thing was the issue it was revivify. We had a pair of casters able to quicken /reach it easily, and stand up people after they get killed with minimal effort. 1000gp is a meaningless price for death at that level. They kill use, we kill them, its all very bloody. Only we keep standing up.

That's a fifth level spell. You're in low-mid 20s. That's not a task that takes a great deal of optimization, nor one that requires belt of battle.

In fact, belt of battle is not the best way to accomplish this, since you average around four fights a day.

Also, the range of CR opponents you can take on naturally widens as you level. +6 CR becomes a pretty routine fight for my high op group by level 10, and challenging fights are notably higher. Exact variance depends on op level, but by low epic, you can take on some crazy things.

Note that not all fights of a given CR are equal, btw. Careful encounter design is still required. If every encounter can be nuked through in one round, this probably isn't happening. Optimization of the opponents needs to be at least close to on par with the PCs.

So yeah, none of this is Belt of Battle's fault. It sounds a lot more like PCs having a lot more power in general than the opposition did.

[Coidzor]

we were in the low-mid 20s at that point.
Actually, if any one thing was the issue it was revivify. We had a pair of casters able to quicken /reach it easily, and stand up people after they get killed with minimal effort. 1000gp is a meaningless price for death at that level. They kill use, we kill them, its all very bloody. Only we keep standing up.

Really you're just making it sound like epic play isn't for your group or DM and that something along the lines of E6 might be more up your alley. :smallconfused:

[Tyndmyr]

Really you're just making it sound like epic play isn't for your group. :smallconfused:

Yes. Epic is a strange and crazy ball of wax, and treating it like the preceding levels does not work well. Many groups don't do well with epic at all, and even among those that do...it typically takes a LOT of GM prep time. I would not generally draw sweeping generalizations about the entire game based on epic play.

[Mystify]

I didn't say anything about revivify and belt of battle being linked. I said that revivify broke the game because death became completely meaningless. It wasn't even a road bump.

And stop pulling examples ofshapechange abuse to prove that its ineffective. Shapechange is known to be own of the most absurdly powerful, abusable spells in the game. The main thing I'm getting from you is that shapechange is horribly overpowered, which we all know already.

[Tyndmyr]

I didn't say anything about revivify and belt of battle being linked. I said that revivify broke the game because death became completely meaningless. It wasn't even a road bump.

Soo....how does that support your belt of battle claims at all?

[Hirax]

Ok. Forget shapechange altogether. The point of that example was that for 170k, there are better options, which would probably be more appropriately listed in another thread if it's of interest. I only used the example I did because it nicely subsumed your entire purpose in purchasing the quicken rod (more spells per round). I would never consider a greater quicken rod in a game with magic marts that used normal WBL guidelines.

edit: to be clear, when I say better options, I don't necessarily mean better options for casting more spells more quickly, I mean that there are better options than a greater quicken rod that have nothing to do with casting more spells more quickly. See the list of magic items in one of my earlier posts, that included a ring of spell battle and amulet of second chances, among other things.

[Mystify]

Ok. Forget shapechange altogether. The point of that example was that for 170k, there are better options, which would probably be more appropriately listed in another thread if it's of interest. I only used the example I did because it nicely subsumed your entire purpose in purchasing the quicken rod (more spells per round). I would never consider a greater quicken rod in a game with magic marts that used normal WBL guidelines.

edit: to be clear, when I say better options, I don't necessarily mean better options for casting more spells more quickly, I mean that there are better options than a greater quicken rod that have nothing to do with casting more spells more quickly. See the list of magic items in one of my earlier posts, that included a ring of spell battle and amulet of second chances, among other things.
but by level 20, you have ample money to get all off those items as well. And getting 3 greater is overkill, some being lesser or least can still have you doing impressive things constantly for a low spell level cost.


And I have not been saying that belt of battle single handily broke the campaign. All I'm saying is that it is overpowered for that price.

[Tyndmyr]

but by level 20, you have ample money to get all off those items as well. And getting 3 greater is overkill, some being lesser or least can still have you doing impressive things constantly for a low spell level cost.

So? You don't balance things around level 20. That's not really the average level played at, and by then, balance is probably already at about the worst possible point. Plenty of builds that are utterly broken(for good or ill) at 20 are fairly reasonable early on. And it's pretty much intended that you're a magical christmas tree by then.

A balanced item is one that is competitive within it's niche with other items, and has some uniqueness to it(ie, some reason to prefer it in some situations). Belt of Battle is actually pretty good on that score. The fact that you could get all items in a given niche at a certain WBL is basically irrelevant.


And I have not been saying that belt of battle single handily broke the campaign. All I'm saying is that it is overpowered for that price.

And you have, thus far, not made that case. It seems like a relatively minor contributing factor(and only that because it's a multiplicative effect on already broken chars).

[Gullintanni]

but by level 20, you have ample money to get all off those items as well. And getting 3 greater is overkill, some being lesser or least can still have you doing impressive things constantly for a low spell level cost.

And I have not been saying that belt of battle single handily broke the campaign. All I'm saying is that it is overpowered for that price.

I listed a number of items that would be higher priority for a given character than the Belt of Battle. Unless all of those are also overpowered, then the argument doesn't really hold water. Only one such item, the Nightstick, is really overpowered, and even that is only OP when you allow them to stack. Individually, they're not that impressive.

[Coidzor]

I didn't say anything about revivify and belt of battle being linked. I said that revivify broke the game because death became completely meaningless. It wasn't even a road bump.

Yes, that's kind of a given for epic play. Death is more like a negative status condition in an RPG that has weak status conditions than a major impediment.

If it doesn't destroy your soul, you're back up either immediately after the fight or during it, depending upon how little the people with resurrection magics have to do with their actions.

If this is a problem for you then you probably shouldn't be playing at Epic levels, and, as I mentioned previously, E6 would be worth looking into as more suiting your sensibilities.

[Mystify]

I listed a number of items that would be higher priority for a given character than the Belt of Battle. Unless all of those are also overpowered, then the argument doesn't really hold water. Only one such item, the Nightstick, is really overpowered, and even that is only OP when you allow them to stack. Individually, they're not that impressive.

nightsticks are still overpowerd in the context of divine feats. They were meant for turning undead, and thats it. in that context, they are perfectly reasonable.


I'm not familiar enough with most of the others, but some of them did sound rather overpowered for that price. The helmet of int is an obvious choice, yes, but its a basic, staple item. Its supposed to be a normal stepping stone for all int-based characters. monk's belt requires you to give up armour, so while a mage doesn't really lose anything, it doesn't really help them much. I would easily take a belt of battle before a monk's belt any day.

As for quicken rods, even without going to the extreme like I did, a least quicken rod is awesome at mid levels. You have tons of low level spells that you wouldn't get around to casting anyways. action economy is still important, so being able to cast a low level spell in addition to what you are already planning on doing is worth quite a bit. The belt of battle gets you earlier access to that type of ability, and it scales up to higher level spells for no additional cost.

[Coidzor]

nightsticks are still overpowerd in the context of divine feats. They were meant for turning undead, and thats it. in that context, they are perfectly reasonable.

Divine Metamagic Persist being the exception, and even then, that only really can get abused if one is able to draw from multiple nightsticks simultaneously, rather than being able to use nightsticks to stretch out an additional one or two persisted spells, which is more about DMM Persist Spell, an additional 3 uses of Divine feats isn't really going to be enough of a thing to be overpowered, since most divine feats, while nice, are not quite that nice.

[Starbuck_II]

If this is a problem for you then you probably shouldn't be playing at Epic levels, and, as I mentioned previously, E6 would be worth looking into as more suiting your sensibilities.

Mayber E8 would fit better, but yeah Epic is much different.

[Mystify]

Mayber E8 would fit better, but yeah Epic is much different.

what do you mean by E6 and E8?

[Hirax]

I agree that lesser quicken rods can be a good buy, but with both real characters and theoretical characters I've made, I've never had room for a greater quicken rod, unless you start using tricks to break WBL. I'd be happy to dig up some sample expenditure lists if you'd like. As for a belt of battle, I agree you haven't made much of a case that a second spell in one round once per day is overpowered. It's right in line with the ring of spell battle, monk's belt, greater truedeath crystals, +10 competence to a skill check items, crystal mask of mindarmor, cloak of resistance +3, and other similarly priced items.

[Mystify]

I agree that lesser quicken rods can be a good buy, but with both real characters and theoretical characters I've made, I've never had room for a greater quicken rod, unless you start using tricks to break WBL. I'd be happy to dig up some sample expenditure lists if you'd like. As for a belt of battle, I agree you haven't made much of a case that a second spell in one round once per day is overpowered. It's right in line with the ring of spell battle, monk's belt, greater truedeath crystals, +10 competence to a skill check items, crystal mask of mindarmor, cloak of resistance +3, and other similarly priced items.

But with those items, everyone in the party doesn't leap on them like they are ade of solid platinium.By that level, most of those items I will have swapped out for other items. But not the belt of battle. Even if I can't combine enchantments, that is the belt I will take. Its trickier with martial characters, since a belt of strength is really nice, and generally better, but if I can get that enchantment on something else or stack the enchantments, the belt of battle is too useful. It may not allow you to tackle every encounter in a day easily, but it still gives a very huge advantage when you do use it.

[Hirax]

I don't agree at all, especially that all those items would get replaced. Rings of spellbattle are useful to everyone and never stop being useful. Again, you're making way too much out of a second action in a round once per day.

[Mystify]

I don't agree at all, especially that all those items would get replaced. Rings of spellbattle are useful to everyone and never stop being useful. Again, you're making way too much out of a second action in a round once per day.

Well, if you have 4-5 battles a day, that is a significant edge in 1/4 of your battles. An extra full round can easily drop a few more enemies before they can drop you, thereby lowering their damage output over the rest of the encounter, and letting you come out of it with less investment. if you don't make it to 4 battles, it is an even stronger advantage. And considering how fast combat can be, an extra round can literally double your damage for the entire encounter.

ring of spellbattle looks nice, but its not something my level 20 character will trip over himself to get. There are too many awesome rings you could have instead. Spellbattle only helps you if you have sufficient spellcraft, so its not useful to everyone. It only helps if there is another spellcsater within 60 ft casting as spell, whilst the belt of battle can help in any encounter, no matter what you are fighting.

[Averis Vol]

This is what they were talking about as "errata you pay for".

ohhh, i didn't know that. okay, makes sense.

[Hirax]

You continue to undervalue other items and greatly overvalue the belt of battle. Nothing you describe makes a belt of battle sound at all overpowered for 10k, it's right in line with all the items I mentioned.

[Mystify]

You continue to undervalue other items and greatly overvalue the belt of battle. Nothing you describe makes a belt of battle sound at all overpowered for 10k, it's right in line with all the items I mentioned.

Well, lets look at other belts:

ruby cincture of immutability: negates shapechanges against you 1/day. an extra full round is more likely to be useful any given day. You don't get polymorphed very often.

monk's belt: can be useful, for certain builds.

spare hand: its a limited quick draw, unless you have an artificer to power it

belt of dwarvenkind: you are dwarflike.. oooh, powerful

deperation chain 1/day cast a 3rd level or lower spell while helpless. nice, but its relative power drops off as you are getting higher in levels. being helpless from negate hp becomes decreasingly likely as you level up, and you should avoid becoming helpless in the first place.

incarnum focus(belt): something for psionics

gwaeron's belt :a flaming wepaon for 12 rounds and wind walk. Well, I'drather get a flying ability, and an extra full round is better than an extra d6 fire, which will likely hit resistances and fizzle at high levels.

Belt of giant stregth: this one is good.

----
Yeah, I pretty much will end up with a belt of battle, unless I need to have a belt of strength.
It pretty much stands out as the singular best belt item.

[Gullintanni]

But with those items, everyone in the party doesn't leap on them like they are ade of solid platinium.By that level, most of those items I will have swapped out for other items. But not the belt of battle. Even if I can't combine enchantments, that is the belt I will take. Its trickier with martial characters, since a belt of strength is really nice, and generally better, but if I can get that enchantment on something else or stack the enchantments, the belt of battle is too useful. It may not allow you to tackle every encounter in a day easily, but it still gives a very huge advantage when you do use it.

Okay you just said it here yourself, you'd take the Belt of Giant Strength over the Belt of Battle.

They're pretty close to the same price, 12K vs. 16K for a +4 to stat item.

If item A is preferable to item B, and item B is overpowered, then item A is over-overpowered by definition. Assume for a moment that every stat booster was a belt and you could not stack enchantments. In that case, nobody would ever take a Belt of Battle by your own logic.

And you're coming to the right conclusion to be honest. A stat booster offers a continuous, strong advantage at all times, vs a Belt of Battle which offers a strong advantage once per day. The choice is obvious really, and it also helps crystallize the idea that the BoB is definitely in the correct item tier.

You could argue that a BoB is overpowered relative to other belts, but power, as it is defined in 3.5 D&D, is not arbitrarily confined to what fits in your belt slot, but is comprised of the sum of all your items and abilities, and relative to other items at or around that price point, a Belt of Battle is certainly competitive, but it's far from an ironclad necessity.

[Mystify]

Okay you just said it here yourself, you'd take the Belt of Giant Strength over the Belt of Battle.

They're pretty close to the same price, 12K vs. 16K for a +4 to stat item.

If item A is preferable to item B, and item B is overpowered, then item A is over-overpowered by definition. Assume for a moment that every stat booster was a belt and you could not stack enchantments. In that case, nobody would ever take a Belt of Battle by your own logic.

And you're coming to the right conclusion to be honest. A stat booster offers a continuous, strong advantage at all times, vs a Belt of Battle which offers a strong advantage once per day. The choice is obvious really, and it also helps crystallize the idea that the BoB is definitely in the correct item tier.
I've seen belt of battle end too many encounters to really buy that.

[Hirax]

For the sake of argument I'll make things simple and work under the assumption that it's the best belt. Even if that's the case, that doesn't make it overpowered for its price. At best, it makes other belts underpowered. 10,000 is a perfectly reasonable price for what belts of battle do. The way you talk about encounters is starting to make me agree with others, and that the problem is poor encounter design on the part of your DMs, and not a flaw with the belt.

[Gullintanni]

Pardon, but to buy what...your own logic? You agreed that the Belt of Giant Strength is the better purchase. I just applied your logic to the situation. An extra turn can end encounters. But that's the point. Once a resource is spent, it's spent. The next fight, the BoB won't end the encounter. You see how we're going in circles here now?

You keep raising up arguments that have been shot down in hopes that they'll survive this round of scrutiny. BoB gives you a competitive advantage for one fight.

[Mystify]

Pardon, but to buy what...your own logic? You agreed that the Belt of Giant Strength is the better purchase. I just applied your logic to the situation. An extra turn can end encounters. But that's the point. Once a resource is spent, it's spent. The next fight, the BoB won't end the encounter. You see how we're going in circles here now?

You keep raising up arguments that have been shot down in hopes that they'll survive this round of scrutiny. BoB gives you a competitive advantage for one fight.

if the belt of battle it winning 1/4 of the encounters in a day, that is very powerful. Considering we have more than 4 belts of battle in the group, somebody can always use one to give us a large lead.

[Seer_of_Heart]

Okay you just said it here yourself, you'd take the Belt of Giant Strength over the Belt of Battle.

They're pretty close to the same price, 12K vs. 16K for a +4 to stat item.

If item A is preferable to item B, and item B is overpowered, then item A is over-overpowered by definition. Assume for a moment that every stat booster was a belt and you could not stack enchantments. In that case, nobody would ever take a Belt of Battle by your own logic.

And you're coming to the right conclusion to be honest. A stat booster offers a continuous, strong advantage at all times, vs a Belt of Battle which offers a strong advantage once per day. The choice is obvious really, and it also helps crystallize the idea that the BoB is definitely in the correct item tier.

You could argue that a BoB is overpowered relative to other belts, but power, as it is defined in 3.5 D&D, is not arbitrarily confined to what fits in your belt slot, but is comprised of the sum of all your items and abilities, and relative to other items at or around that price point, a Belt of Battle is certainly competitive, but it's far from an ironclad necessity.

I'm 99% certain that you can add an ability enhancement to any item without an increase in price. Even if you can't its only 6k extra to combine effects.

[Curmudgeon]

I'm 99% certain that you can add an ability enhancement to any item without an increase in price. Even if you can't its only 6k extra to combine effects.
Well, you're quite a few percentage points off the mark. You can add some ability enhancements to some items without a price mark-up. See Magic Item Compendium on page 234 for which enhancements are considered "common" additions to which body slots.

[Seer_of_Heart]

Well, you're quite a few percentage points off the mark. You can add some ability enhancements to some items without a price mark-up. See Magic Item Compendium on page 234 for which enhancements are considered "common" additions to which body slots.

Ah yes, I messed up in wording it. But for this case adding a strength bonus to a belt of battle its 100% ok.

[Corundum Dragon]

How about comparing some belts. Monk's Belt 9kgp, Belt of Dwarvenkind 14,900 gp, Belt of Endurance 10k gp, Belt of Giant Strength 16k gp (+4) or 36k gp (+6), Belt of Magnificence 25k gp (+2), 100k gp (+4) or 200k gp (+6), Belt of One Mighty Blow 1,500 gp, Belt of Spell Resistance 90k gp (sr 21), Belt of Great Prowess 12,500 gp (+2 str, dex, con), 50,000 gp (+4 str, dex, con), 112,500 gp (+6 str, dex, con), Belt of Retribution 150k gp, Belt of Merfolk Kind 6k gp, Belt of the Centaur 9k gp
I think i would prefer +1 twilight mithral chain shirt and a Mithral Buckler ( 6.115 gp) (+6 AC and +6 dex) over a monks belt. Maybe add monks to another belt in case I'm ever caught with my shirt off. Add light to heavy Fortification and Soulfire Armor Enhancement. Although I think I would upgrade to Battle Wizard's Armor (12,250 gp) first.
As for Bob I think I would go for Belt of Great Prowess and upgrade to Belt of Magnificence when I got enough gold. Add bob to it latter.
If you want an item with serious misuse potential Circlet of the Wyrm one umd and you are any wyrm age dragon you want with all stats and abilities except spell casting, and probably not breath weapon or flying. And if you have a template that gives you the dragon type your still a wyrm age dragon and you can just umd to switch types.
Shield of the Sun (+5) one little quest then one a year and you can cast lv 20 paladin spell at wis 20, Sr 15, absorbs the first 10 points of damage from any energy attack. You could potentially get this at first lv. If the retrieving it is the quest and the thief tries to use it they receive four negative levels.