Amulet of Mighty Fists: Can I do this?

[SimonMoon6]

This is purely hypothetical. I am not in any campaign nor do I expect to be in one in the near future. Still, I've been thinking about monsters as PCs a lot and thinking about how many of them need an amulet of mighty fists, so I've been thinking about the limitations of this item.

It's expensive, but you could get it up to +5. Oh, sure, you could have someone cast a permanent Greater Magic Fang instead, but you have to do that for *each* natural attack, and then it could still be dispelled, wasting your money.

But a +5 amulet can't have any other cool weapon properties (like holy or flaming or shocking burst). Still, you can make an amulet with those properties. And since you don't have to give an amulet any plusses to add those abilities, you *could* get a +0 amulet which is holy, flaming, and shocking burst. Of course, that's still pretty darn expensive.

But here's my idea: suppose instead of an amulet, I make, say, a hat (or boots or goggles or bracelets or whatever) of mighty fists. I suppose I could have a +0 hat of mighty fists with the holy, flaming, and shocking burst properties. Or to keep things simple (and less expensive), maybe just a holy +0 hat.

Now, suppose I wear this hat *and* the previously mentioned +5 amulet of mighty fists. Can I use them both? They both enhance your unarmed and natural attacks, but they aren't doing the same thing. There's probably some reason why I can't do this, but if so, I don't know what it is.

Because if I *could* do this, then I could easily imagine a monk with a +0 holy hat, a +0 shocking burst belt, +0 flaming boots, +0 axiomatic goggles, a +0 frost cloak, and so forth. And that would help give a bunch of bonuses to these attacks in a fairly inexpensive way (well, still really expensive, but less so than otherwise).

Oh, sure, there's the whole "item slot" issue, but just add the "mighty fists" ability to a pre-existing item for twice the cost of the "mighty fists". For a "+1" equivalent weapon property, that's 5k *2 = 10k. Getting three of those in various items would only cost 30k, which is much less than trying to get the same bonuses in one item (45k for a +3 mighty fists item normally). But even that's not the point. The point would be being able to have virtually every weapon property that can be given to an amulet of mighty fists active at the same time.

Of course, that's still ridiculously expensive because amulets of mighty fists are really expensive. I'm just wondering if that's even possible though.

[ericgrau]

Typically +1 is the minimum before you add other enchantments. Multiple items are obviously cheaper and stronger than a single item, so I don't think it should be allowed. Some DMs allow a single amulet of mighty fists with special properties, and there's also the amulet of natural attacks which allows it explicitly (but that item only applies to one natural attack).

The amulet of natural attacks gives it for a single natural attack at a lower cost, so you might look into that. And unlike the amulet of mighty fists it's reasonable to allow multiple as long as each one applies to a different natural attack.

I'll cut off the "let melee have nice things" comments with "depending on silly tricks is NOT the way to do it." If you want it then give it to them directly not via jumping through hoops and limiting their options through item tax or feat tax.

[subject42]

Typically +1 is the minimum before you add other enchantments. Multiple items are obviously cheaper and stronger than a single item, so I don't think it should be allowed. Some DMs allow a single amulet of mighty fists with special properties, and there's also the amulet of natural attacks which allows it explicitly (but that item only applies to one natural attack).

Does the 3.5 Amulet of Mighty fists have the +1 requirement? I only have Pathfinder material on hand, which explicitly says that the Amulet doesn't need to have a +1 before adding special qualities.

[ericgrau]

Weapons normally need a +1 before adding other enchantments. Technically the amulet of mighty fists doesn't allow other enchantments period without a house rule and the amulet of natural attacks works similar to weapons. Pathfinder added the +0 requirement and the ability to add new enchantments. Given how easy it is to get a 24 hour greater magic fang or two by the time you can afford either amulet, PF's +0 minimum was a power bump to be sure.

A +0 minimum isn't a bad house rule if the DM wants to give out that power bump. Unlike other item tax it uses an item you're expected to get one of anyway (though not more than one like the above) and it adds options instead of removing options.

[Greenish]

The above mentioned Necklace of Natural Attacks can be found here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) (scroll down).

[prufock]

I don't think you can have a +0 item of anything, but I see no problem with making these items in their own right, using the item creation guidelines. Belt of Continuous Sonic Weapon, Cloak of Continuous Align Weapon, etc.

[Godskook]

1.An Amulet of Mighty Fists, in 3.5, is not a weapon-like item, and does not follow rules for weapon-crafting. You can't make a +1 holy vicious bane amulet of mighty fists. Only option is an enhancement bonus ranging from +1 to +5.

2.The value of the Amulet of Mighty Fists is that it applies to all your natural attacks, making it far more valuable on builds with larger numbers of natural attacks, or as gifts for dragons. For your average monk, its just not worth it.

3.As for a necklace of natural attacks, I'd rule that for balance's sake, you can't do anything with it that you couldn't do normally with a weapon. Considering the cost is within 300 gold of what you'd pay for swords like that, I think this is reasonable. As far as making a necklace that effected different attacks differently, I think this is a fair ruling. However, neither part is addressed directly in the rules, but the first half is implied.

[Coidzor]

Eh? Last I checked the necklace of natural attacks just had an additional cost for every natural weapon that was a beneficiary of its effects.

I believe the point where the amulet of mighty fists became cost effective was either at 3 natural attacks where it was roughly the same as the necklace of natural attacks but ahead by a nose or was well ahead by 4 natural attacks. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10994.0)

[Godskook]

Eh? Last I checked the necklace of natural attacks just had an additional cost for every natural weapon that was a beneficiary of its effects.

Cost for 2 +5 short swords: 100,620gp
Cost for a necklace of natural attacks for 2 claws: 101,200gp
Difference per 'weapon': 290
Total difference: 580

Cost for 3 +5 short swords: 150,930gp
Cost for a necklace of natural attacks for 3 claws: 151,800gp
Difference per 'weapon': 290
Total difference: 870

[Telonius]

I think what he's getting at is a character who has...

Necklace of natural attacks +1 bane
Boots of natural attacks +1 flaming
Goggles of natural attacks +1 frost
Vest of natural attacks +1 bane x
etc.

Basically, you could get a whole bunch of extra +1-equivalent enhancements as long as they're on different parts of the body. Since the cost is spread out, the higher value isn't multiplied. You could get the effect of a (head eyes torso cloak amulet bracers boots.... okay let's stop there for sanity) +8 weapon. So let's say he wants to enhance just one fist to get a +1 Bane, Defending, Flame, Frost, Shock, Ghost Touch, Thundering attack.

If he does that through Necklace of Natural Attacks alone, that would be 128,600gp (128k for the enhancements, plus 600 for the necklace) per natural attack enhanced. But if he gets a gizmo of +1 Bane, a gizmo of +1 defending, and so on, it's (8600*8) = 68,800gp. The enhancement bonuses wouldn't stack, but everything else would. And that's even if you rule that the necklace has to be +1 before you put on any additional enhancements. If not, it's (2600*8) = 20,800 total gp per natural attack enhanced. Either way, it's a big discount. And thanks to the MiC rules, it doesn't cost anything extra to stack that on top of an existing magic item.

(I should add that in no way would I allow this as a DM.)

[Godskook]

And thanks to the MiC rules, it doesn't cost anything extra to stack that on top of an existing magic item.

1.MiC says no such thing. The section you're thinking of lists a very small list of enchantments that can work that way, and only on a limited number of slots. The necklace of natural attacks is not on that list.

2.There's no hard-fast rules for changing the slot on an item, nor for adding it to another item.

3.Stacking multiple versions of the necklace is violating the spirit of, if not the wording, the bonus stacking rules.

[Cruiser1]

2.There's no hard-fast rules for changing the slot on an item, nor for adding it to another item.
The SRD gives rules for both situations (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm#addingNewAbilities). :) Changing the slot of an item makes it cost 1.5x, so Boots of Natural Attacks cost 1.5x of the Amulet of Natural Attacks. Adding an item to an existing item also costs 1.5x normally. (However if the item being added is one of the standard simple ones described in MIC, the cost is the same as the two items separately.) A slotless item that doesn't take up a body slot at all costs 2x.

[Godskook]

The SRD gives rules for both situations (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm#addingNewAbilities). :) Changing the slot of an item makes it cost 1.5x, so Boots of Natural Attacks cost 1.5x of the Amulet of Natural Attacks. Adding an item to an existing item also costs 1.5x normally. (However if the item being added is one of the standard simple ones described in MIC, the cost is the same as the two items separately.) A slotless item that doesn't take up a body slot at all costs 2x.

You missed the part where I said "hard-fast". Those rules have always been considered part of the "Rule 0 or we get pun-pun" region of the game, and are thus not hard-fast.

[Than]

The necklace cost is already calculated with the 1.5x cost because of the slot change from weapon to necklace. Making it a pair of boots instead would be of the exact same cost.

Now some claw blades to reinforce your claws. those would only cost 1.0x and be cheaper than both. Basically if we stick with unarmed attacks the amulet of mighty fists becomes pointless if your DM allows cestus or brass knucks to deal your normal unarmed damage as a monk (or 1d6 lethal if not a monk). The cost to enchant is much lower.

[Godskook]

The necklace cost is already calculated with the 1.5x cost because of the slot change from weapon to necklace. Making it a pair of boots instead would be of the exact same cost.

Except it isn't calculated at 1.5 cost. Its calculated at the same base costs as a normal weapon.