Magic Item suggestion

[Cranthis]

So, in an upcoming game, I will be playing an ECL 3 sneak attack character. We having 2700 gold to work with, standard wealth for ecl 3. The dm is allowing us to us it on anything. So far, I have chosen the weapon enchantment that gives +1d6 sneak attack damage with the weapon.

I was wondering if the playground had any better recommendations.

[docnessuno]

Any weapon with that propriety is going to cost at least 8300 gp, so that's not a valid option.

To apply a magical propriety to a weapon / armor, the item needs to have already a +1 enhancement bonus.
Considering the propriety you mentioned is a +1 one, this would mean that the final item would be priced as a +2 weapon, costing 8000 (+2 equivalent enhancement) + 300 (masterwork) + base weapon price.

Gear for a level 3 rogue:
Masterwork melee weapon (300+ gp)
Masterwork melee weapon (300+ gp) (only if you plan to dual wield)
Masterwork ranged weapon (300+ gp)
+1 armor (1150+ gp)
Mundane equipment

Knowing your stats, race and feat selection would help.

[Cranthis]

Any weapon with that propriety is going to cost at least 8300 gp, so that's not a valid option.

To apply a magical propriety to a weapon / armor, the item needs to have already a +1 enhancement bonus.
Considering the propriety you mentioned is a +1 one, this would mean that the final item would pr priced as a +2 weapon, costing 8000 (+2 equivalent enhancement) + 300 (masterwork) + base weapon price.

You misunderstood the post. I was looking for reccomendations to take instead of that?

[Killer Angel]

You misunderstood the post. I was looking for reccomendations to take instead of that?

To be fair, I was in the same line of thought of docnessuno


So, in an upcoming game, I will be playing an ECL 3 sneak attack character. We having 2700 gold to work with, standard wealth for ecl 3. The dm is allowing us to us it on anything. So far, I have chosen the weapon enchantment that gives +1d6 sneak attack damage with the weapon.

I was wondering if the playground had any better recommendations.

It's very easy to misunderstand your post.
You are looking for better recommendations, but that +1d6 isn't available

Anyway, what you're looking for? weapons, miscellaneous, what else?

[Cranthis]

Anything I suppose. I think I am mixing something up in my head about item costs haha.

[JellyPooga]

As mentioned, a layout of what sort of build you have would be useful. 2,700 isn't a hell of a lot to be playing with, so your options are fairly limited, especially if (for example) you're playing a thrower and/or TWF build. An Archer build would have its obvious shoe-ins with magic arrows, but if you aren't using a bow, then that's not an option.

Generically speaking, Rogues and sneaky characters tend to enjoy the utility that comes with minor one-shots that they can use when their sneak attack is obfuscated (e.g. against Undead, the Rogue handily happens to have a few jars of Holy Water in his pack). The "big-buy" item for this kind of thing (though it eats most of your up-front money) is the Handy Haversack, letting you get to your gear quickly.

[Cranthis]

It is a two weapon fighting build. 10,15,15,16,10,10 (32 point buy) Human, dark creature template, feats: Two weapon fighting, Weapon Finesse, Improved initiative, Craven, Darkstalker. One level of rogue, one level of fighter.
I have a Scimitar main hand, and Short Sword off hand.

Now I'm deciding between the masterwork set or the Haversack of goodies.

[JellyPooga]

Now I'm deciding between the masterwork set or the Haversack of goodies.

It depends on what sort of campaign you're up against. If you expect to come across much in the way of Undead or other critters that you can't Sneak Attack, then you'll probably want the "bag o' goodies", but if you're pretty sure that you're not, then the MW gear is probably a safer bet.

Having said that, your access to gear in the game itself is also a factor. If you're going to be limited after character gen, then picking up something that you might not have access to later on would be prudent. E.g. MW weapons are relatively commonplace compared to, say, Quaal's Feather Tokens, even though they cost significantly more, so if you wanted a Feather Token, pick it up at char gen and grab a MW weapon later.

[Cranthis]

It depends on what sort of campaign you're up against. If you expect to come across much in the way of Undead or other critters that you can't Sneak Attack, then you'll probably want the "bag o' goodies", but if you're pretty sure that you're not, then the MW gear is probably a safer bet.

Well, once I hit level 4 I won't have to worry about that, as I will be able to sneak attack anything. This is thanks to to the Penetrating strike ACF for rogues (Dungeonscape) and Darkstalker. I think the MW is better for now.

[Killer Angel]

Now I'm deciding between the masterwork set or the Haversack of goodies.

Well, if you go for the haversack, better to fill it with something useful and cheap.
Go for some caltrops, a tanglefoot bag, acid, holy water...

[BowStreetRunner]

I have always found that DMs like to throw DR into the mix as a counter to the power of TWF characters. If this is the case, it can be nice to have an answer ready at hand.

MW Dagger (302gp) vs DR/Slashing or DR/Piercing
MW Cold Iron Dagger (304gp) vs DR/Cold Iron
MW Light Mace (305gp) vs DR/Bludgeoning
MW Alchemical Silver Dagger (322gp) vs DR/Silver
Magical +1 Dagger (2302gp) vs DR/Magic
MW Adamantine Dagger (3002gp) vs DR/Adamantine
Holy* +1 Dagger (18302gp) [*or Anarchic/Axiomatic/Unholy] vs DR/Good, Evil, Law, Chaos

You could probably afford to pick up the first 4 now, and acquire the rest later. Depending on your party, you may be able to get around the need for some - for instance if you have a cleric casting Align Weapon for you.

[herrhauptmann]

Half charged wands, especially if you haveUMD.
Lesser vigor, grave strike, etc

[mattie_p]

Healing belt (750 gp, MIC) never hurts on a squishy melee character.

[Darrin]

You misunderstood the post. I was looking for reccomendations to take instead of that?

Any enhancement that does +1d6 energy damage will also apply to sneak attacks, so it's cheaper to just pick up the shock or corrosive property instead. If you can't afford a +2 weapon (+1 enhancement, +1 property), then a Lesser Crystal of Energy Assault is going to be cheaper:

2300 GP, +1 weapon
3000 GP, lesser crystal of energy assault (I recommend acid to start with)

Given your 2700 GP budget, even that may not be available, but you can *almost* get there with:

2300 GP, +1 weapon
100 GP, wand chamber (Dungeonscape)
750 GP, wand of blades of fire (Spell Compendium, swift action for +1d8 fire damage on two weapons, assuming you can UMD a wand without too much trouble)

If your DM lets you buy partially-charged wands, then you can get a +1 weapon + wand chamber + wand of blades of fire (20 charges) for 2700 GP. That may last you until you can afford an augment crystal, but it doesn't leave much left over for buying armor and equipment (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148101).

[Curmudgeon]

Half charged wands, especially if you haveUMD.
Lesser vigor, grave strike, etc
Not likely to work very well with +0 CHA mod and only 2 levels, one with Use Magic Device cross-class and low skill points.

[herrhauptmann]

Not likely to work very well with +0 CHA mod and only 2 levels, one with Use Magic Device cross-class and low skill points.

So they're less useful for now. Shortly the skill points in UMD from his rogue levels will make his charisma score and multiclass level irrelevant.
And even if they are less useful now, why not have the cleric spend the wand to heal the rogue when the cleric is in spell-save mode?

[Cranthis]

One issue with all of this. It says that a +1 enchantment negates the masterwork bonus. Why does that mean a +1 enchanted weapon costs 8000+ weapon costs, as opposed to the 2000+?

[herrhauptmann]

One issue with all of this. It says that a +1 enchantment negates the masterwork bonus. Why does that mean a +1 enchanted weapon costs 8000+ weapon costs, as opposed to the 2000+?

It's referring to the +1 attack you get for it being a masterwork.
Otherwise, a +1 sword would be: +2 attack, +1 damage.

[Cranthis]

I'm sorry, but that didn't really explain why if it negates the +1 to hit, why the weapon would be a +2.

[herrhauptmann]

I'm sorry, but that didn't really explain why if it negates the +1 to hit, why the weapon would be a +2.

+1 magic, and +1 masterwork.
The magic and the masterwork don't stack for your to-hit bonus.

[Cranthis]

+1 magic, and +1 masterwork.
The magic and the masterwork don't stack for your to-hit bonus.

But it doesn't say it doesn't stack, it says it negates it. It all sounds very BS-y to me.

[Nettlekid]

The +1 to attack granted by Masterwork is an Enhancement bonus. So is the +1 to attack granted by being a +1 weapon. So they don't stack.

[Cranthis]

The +1 to attack granted by Masterwork is an Enhancement bonus. So is the +1 to attack granted by being a +1 weapon. So they don't stack.

Ok, so if you got a +1 enchantment, lets say its corrosive, so 1d6 acid. You buy a short sword with it on it. It costs 8000+, despite the fact that you lost the +1 to hit.

[Nettlekid]

I think you're combining a few things. First you buy a weapon. You make it masterworked for +300 gold, and that gives you a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls with that weapon. Then you make it a magic, +1 weapon. That grants it a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls +1 enhancement bonus on damage rolls. Because that bonus to attack is an enhancement bonus, same as the masterworked, it does not stack and is effectively overridden. Next, you make it a +1 Corrosive Weapon. The pricing for Corrosive is the equivalent of adding another +1 to its bonus, so a +1 Corrosive Weapon costs the same as a +2 Weapon. You cannot have just a Corrosive Weapon, it must be at least a +1 Corrosive Weapon. This +1 Corrosive Weapon will have a +1 enhancement to attack and damage from its magic component, and +1d6 acid damage from being Corrosive. Despite it costing as much as a +2 weapon, it is not actually a +2 weapon, and so does not have a +2 to attack and damage.

[herrhauptmann]

I think the masterwork bonus is considered an enhancement bonus to attack. The +X you get, is also considered an enhancement bonus, so they don't stack. I don't know why it says 'negates,' may be another example of WotC having bad editing. Or maybe it's a legacy thing, older editions used that exact same phrase, so they still use it now.

Back to your question. In case I might not be answering what you're asking. I'm going to use 'flaming' instead of whatever enchantment you mentioned in your first post.

One issue with all of this. It says that a +1 enchantment negates the masterwork bonus. Why does that mean a +1 enchanted weapon costs 8000+ weapon costs, as opposed to the 2000+?
You buy a MW dagger. 302gold
You enchant that dagger to be a +1 dagger. 2302gold.
Now, you can make it a +2 dagger, or a +1 flaming (total cost +2) for 8302.

You can't buy a MW dagger, and just make it flaming for a total cost of 2302.

When people say it's 8k for your weapon, they mean you have to have a +1 Flaming weapon which has a total cost of +2; rather than a MW flaming weapon.


So your dragonborn/dvati spellthieves? Their weapons are technically illegal. Has to be MW before its magical. And has to have a +1 before giving it anything else.
I didn't bring it up because fighting with other players about their character is a good way to get kicked from a game. I thought you were doing it intentionally like that von kriger guy, using bad editing to get what you want, rather than following the rules.
Their armor too for that matter. It has to have the basic +1 before you can give it other enchantments like silent moves.

edit:
Wow, super-ninjad. Gotta stop checking facebook mid-post.

[Cranthis]

Yes, I'm going to have to go fix that. Also, thanks everyone, I think I've got the idea now.

[herrhauptmann]

Yes, I'm going to have to go fix that. Also, thanks everyone, I think I've got the idea now.

Sorry.
Fortunately for that game at least, we're not in combat yet. So it shouldn't be an issue.