PDA

View Full Version : Ring of Enduring Arcana



Melcar
2013-09-30, 09:36 AM
Hi guys...

I found this very nice ring:

Ring of Enduring Arcana
Well loved by casters who expect to face rivals with similar
abilities, a ring of enduring arcana renders your spells more
resistant to dispelling.
Description: This ring is actually a webwork lattice of gold
and mithral that takes up most of the length of the finger.
(It is jointed in the middle to allow full movement.) The lattice
seems to shift and flow any time the wearer casts a spell.
Activation: A ring of enduring arcana remains active constantly,
as long as it is worn. When first donned, however,
it requires 24 hours to acclimate to the wearer before it
functions.
Effect: You are considered four levels higher than your
actual caster level whenever another character attempts to
dispel or counter one of your spells.
Aura/Caster Level: Moderate abjuration. CL 9th.
Construction: Forge Ring, dispel magic, 3,000 gp, 240 XP, 6 days.
Price: 6,000 gp.

Now this is only a caster level 9 item and only uses dispel magic. My question is how do I improve this. Can I create this with a higher bonus? And how?

Personally I was thinking of using greater dispel magic, to gain a +8 bonus. But is this realistic? And how do I calculate prise and such?

Thanks

Chronos
2013-09-30, 09:51 AM
You calculate price however your DM says you do. There are no rules for custom magic items, only guidelines.

That said, the price for most items is quadratic in the bonus granted, so double the bonus will usually cost four times as much.

MesiDoomstalker
2013-09-30, 10:01 AM
Additionally, lets look at the Caster Level versus minimum Dispel Magic Caster Level. Since your normal Wizard gets Dispel Magic at level 5, there's an additional 4 levels for the items Caster Level. So I'd suppose you'd need at least a Caster Level 15 to use Greater Dispel Magic.

Max Caysey
2013-09-30, 10:49 AM
I think that a doubling of the price and bonus will be fine, but ofc, I'm not a pro artificer! :smallsmile:

Snowbluff
2013-09-30, 10:51 AM
The cost should go up with the bonus exponentially.

Silva Stormrage
2013-09-30, 10:54 AM
Seconding the quadruple price. A 12k item for +8 is too cheap. 24k frankly is probably too cheap too, it makes it almost impossible for any of your buffs to be dispelled by an equal level caster.

Melcar
2013-09-30, 10:58 AM
Ok... thanks.

So we go by caster level 15, greater dispel magic and a marked price of 24.000gp.

I was actually thinking of making this into an ioun stone... Does anyone know how to chose the right type of stone/color?

Snowbluff
2013-09-30, 11:06 AM
24,000 for +6 and Doubled if your want an Ioun Stone (Slotless).

Chronos
2013-09-30, 11:10 AM
Quoth Snowbluff:

The cost should go up with the bonus exponentially.
I'm not aware of any item for which the cost goes up exponentially. What's the basis for that?

Silva Stormrage
2013-09-30, 11:18 AM
I'm not aware of any item for which the cost goes up exponentially. What's the basis for that?

Uuuhhh, skill items, ability enhancement items, armor enhancements, weapon enhancements, save bonus (resistance) items, AC bonus (Deflection and other none armor). Pretty much all items that give a scaling bonus to something.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm

gr8artist
2013-09-30, 11:36 AM
Every item ever.

+1 armor: 1000 gold
+2 armor: 4000 gold
+3 armor: 9000 gold

Amulet of protection +1: 2000 gold
+2: 8000 gold
+3: 18000 gold

Under the guidelines for making magical items, it says the cost is ([bonus]^2)x[value dependent on bonus type].
For armor, this value is 1000 gold. For weapons, it's 2000 gold. For skills, I think it's 100 gold. For ability score bonuses, it's 1000 gold.

Chronos
2013-09-30, 11:42 AM
Those are all quadratic, not exponential. Exponential means something to the x, not x to the something.

Melcar
2013-09-30, 11:42 AM
I was thinking, that I wanted the ring to give +8 bonus. If dispel magic gives +4 as a CL 9 item. Greater dispel magic should be able at level 15 or 18 to give +8. This price im thinking would be 24.000gp. Does this seem right?

So im doubling everything, quardrupling the price... right?

Snowbluff
2013-09-30, 11:48 AM
Those are all quadratic, not exponential. Exponential means something to the x, not x to the something.
Yep, you're right.

I was thinking, that I wanted the ring to give +8 bonus. If dispel magic gives +4 as a CL 9 item. Greater dispel magic should be able at level 15 or 18 to give +8. This price im thinking would be 24.000gp. Does this seem right?

24,000 is waaaaaaaay of for +8.

Melcar
2013-09-30, 11:53 AM
Yep, you're right.


24,000 is waaaaaaaay of for +8.

Too much or too little?

Snowbluff
2013-09-30, 11:54 AM
Too much or too little?

Too little. It has been stated earlier this makes dispelling nearly impossible for an equivalent caster.

MesiDoomstalker
2013-09-30, 11:56 AM
Too little. Try something above 60,000. I'd hazard a 90,000 price tag, to be honest. With all the other ways to boost Caster Level, your basically immune to Dispelling against anything that speced for Dispeling or grossly more levels than you.

Crake
2013-09-30, 12:00 PM
I personally wouldn't allow an item to grant a higher bonus than +4. The reason for this is that the highest single bonus to dispel checks is +4, coming from the inquisition domain. Even a dedicated dispeller would be hard pressed to get a bonus of +8, and that would require an investment of feats or class abilities, not gear. The only item I know of that grants a bonus to dispel checks is a dispelling chord, which is limited times/day anyway. So yeah, since there's no hard counter, +8 for a single item, when you can already increase your normal caster level in addition to that for added effect, that would just be too impossible to counterspell/dispel.

Melcar
2013-09-30, 12:00 PM
Too little. It has been stated earlier this makes dispelling nearly impossible for an equivalent caster.

But when you doupple up enchancement bonus to str. from 2-4 you quadruple the price. I cant see how this should be calculated then! And if +4 only costs 6000gp... so I actually think that quardrupple price is fair!

Can anyone show me how the calculationis done?

qwertyu63
2013-09-30, 12:04 PM
Using the normal scaling rules, we can find the price of +1, and work from there.

The +4 ring is 6000. 4^2 is 16. 6000/16 is 375 gp for a +1 ring.

8^2 is 64. 375*64 is 24000 gp for a +8 ring. So that should be your starting point.

That said, this price is too low for the effect, indicating that the basic formula won't work here. I advise doubling the price to 48000 gp, but in the end it is up to your DM.

Melcar
2013-09-30, 12:41 PM
Using the normal scaling rules, we can find the price of +1, and work from there.

The +4 ring is 6000. 4^2 is 16. 6000/16 is 375 gp for a +1 ring.

8^2 is 64. 375*64 is 24000 gp for a +8 ring. So that should be your starting point.

That said, this price is too low for the effect, indicating that the basic formula won't work here. I advise doubling the price to 48000 gp, but in the end it is up to your DM.

But by RAW its 24.000gp right? I'm really quite confused, and at this point just want the RAW facts, as so far they can be found!

Chronos
2013-09-30, 12:50 PM
But by RAW its 24.000gp right?
No. There is no RAW on this topic, beyond the universal rule of "ask your DM". One possible guideline a DM might use to determine the price would be the bonus-squared one. But there are many other ways a DM might decide. As others have mentioned, a DM might just eyeball an estimated price, to get a number like 90,000, or might declare outright that such an item is impossible because it would be too hard to counter. In any of these cases, the DM is equally within the rules as written.

qwertyu63
2013-09-30, 12:52 PM
But by RAW its 24.000gp right? I'm really quite confused, and at this point just want the RAW facts, as so far they can be found!

I have cut my post down to be everything RAW has to say on the topic.


The +4 ring is 6000.

...it is up to your DM.

Melcar
2013-09-30, 01:23 PM
Thanks you...

Psyren
2013-09-30, 01:26 PM
I have cut my post down to be everything RAW has to say on the topic.

I got a chuckle out of that :smallbiggrin: