75,000 for all the time true seeing?

[CyberThread]

Do you think 75k in gold, is cheap, average, or to expensive for all the time true seeing?

[Akal Saris]

I'd say it is a bit on the expensive side, even given the 250g spell component and the way that true seeing easily cancels quite a lot of DM plans in a passive manner. But it's not outrageously expensive - I suspect my ballpark for "would buy such an item" would be 50K or so.

[eggynack]

I'm not sure if you're asking about a theoretical homebrew item, or about the item that actually does exactly that at exactly that price. The post is phrased in the former manner, but it seems a bit coincidental to not be the latter. In case it is the former, and for the information of other posters in case it's the latter, the item in question is the Hathran mask of true seeing (UE, 57).

[Crake]

Considering the Gem of Seeing (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#gemofSeeing) costs 75k and only functions for 30 minutes a day, and needs to be held up to the eye, rather than simply worn like some goggles or something, I'd say no, 75k for permanent true seeing is too cheap.

[Sir Chuckles]

I'd base it off of Permanency and the basic spell costs.
True Seeing, at lowest, is a 5th level Cleric spell, cast by a 9th level Cleric.
That's 450gp, plus 250 for the material costs.

Follow that by Permanency costing the same, but with a Wizard, your actual monetary cost would be 1150gp, minimum.

But, under Permanency, there are tables for such spell effects. Assuming that you could get it cast on you like that (Which would be difficult, as sight-based Permanencies appear to be "Cast by self" only), it would require a 14th level Wizard, plus what would appear to be a 4,500 XP cost for the caster, adding 22,500gp to the cost.

Thus, requiring a 14th level level Wizard, you could assume 23,200gp plus the 450gp for True Seeing from a Cleric (Or 1090gp, if you use the same Wizard).

But that's all assuming you allow it, and following the raw "Hiring a Caster" rules from Goods & Services (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#spell).

I'd say it's too cheap for such powerful effect, but I say the same thing about every other Permanency effect.

[Story]

Considering the Gem of Seeing (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#gemofSeeing) costs 75k and only functions for 30 minutes a day, and needs to be held up to the eye, rather than simply worn like some goggles or something, I'd say no, 75k for permanent true seeing is too cheap.

On the other hand, there's lots of really overpriced junk in the DMG. Ring of Regeneration comes to mind. So that in itself is not an argument that it's too cheap.

[ngilop]

well considering that a gem of seeing is only 30 minutes of true seeing in a day and it is 75K... 75K seems perfect seeing as the gem is an slotleess item..


there is a mask that is continuous true seeing (i think its a mask at least) and its 75K so i see no reason to think that 75K is too much to pay for all the time (continuous) true seeing.

[Kelb_Panthera]

By my calculations its less than half what it should be.

5th level spell times 9th level caster times 2000 equals 90000, and that's before you double it for duration and add in material costs (250*50=12500) for a total of 192500.

[eggynack]

I feel like the fact that I named and sourced the exact item that does this exact thing at this exact price is being oddly ignored. So, y'know, an item of all the time true seeing already costs 75,000. It's a bit out of the way, but doing these distant approximations seems kinda unnecessary.

[Gnome Alone]

Dude, you don't want always-on True Seeing, you'll go like Lovecraftian horror crazy.

"Because when you have stanky old Wizard Eyes, sometimes you see things that are real, and other times it's like crazy, crazy, crazy, in your face, all the time. (sighs) All the time. ”

[Kelb_Panthera]

I feel like the fact that I named and sourced the exact item that does this exact thing at this exact price is being oddly ignored. So, y'know, an item of all the time true seeing already costs 75,000. It's a bit out of the way, but doing these distant approximations seems kinda unnecessary.

I'm not usually one to play this card, but an item from a 3.0 source linked to a very restricted group's iconic badge of status. (the hathrans' masks, seriously?)

It's a dodgy price for the effect.

[Marnath]

I'm not usually one to play this card, but an item from a 3.0 source linked to a very restricted group's iconic badge of status. (the hathrans' masks, seriously?)

It's a dodgy price for the effect.

Inconsistency in my D&D? Absurd, next you'll be telling me I can get a glove of storing that also gives true strike 1/day for a third the price of a normal glove of storing! :smallwink:

[eggynack]

I'm not usually one to play this card, but an item from a 3.0 source linked to a very restricted group's iconic badge of status. (the hathrans' masks, seriously?)

It's a dodgy price for the effect.
Eh, I guess. Still, it's probably a closer link to the goal than these items that get you halfway there. It just feels odd to be arguing about how to theoretically price some theoretical item, when there's a concrete item to discuss the balance of. That might be an issue of semantics rather than content though.

[CyberThread]

Come on down to Hathrans Havetohave, use your club discount card, to get magical items no one else can afford at full price!

[Story]

Come on down to Hathrans Havetohave, use your club discount card, to get magical items no one else can afford at full price!

In our current campaign I actually managed to get one at level 9, though it was discounted since I crafted it myself.

Of course, we're currently going through a module that's considered difficult for 14th level parties, so it's not that ridiculous.

[unseenmage]

I stumbled upon the Sacred Guardian Template's Knowledge Domain ability for the Construct it gets applied to. I was putting it on a Small Effigy and was surprised to find that I got all the time True Seeing for only 7,000gp. On a sentient Construct no less.

But that is in a Dragonlance book (Bestiary of Krynn) so it's even more dodgy than the Hathran Mask or a Permanency equivalency.

[Lord Vukodlak]

True Seeing defeats illusions of all kinds, reveals shapechangers and allows you to peer into the Ethereal Plane. I'd say 75K is to cheap

Strictly by the DMG guidelines for a continuous magic item your talking 180,000gp
Spell Level(5) multiplied by caster level(9) times 2,000gp the normal duration is 1/minute per level so you multiply that result by 2
5x9x2000gpx2

[CombatOwl]

Do you think 75k in gold, is cheap, average, or to expensive for all the time true seeing?

Eh, the normal going rate for that is something like 180,000gp.

Spell Level (5) x Caster Level (9) x 2000 = 90,000

Because True Seeing is 1m/level, that cost is doubled to 180,000. I can't recall if the spell component price has to be included in that or not. I suppose so, if you're getting someone else to do it. Not to mention the price of the base item... I mean, if you're dropping 180,250gp on an item, you're probably going to want to make it out of something other than that free club or quarterstaff you picked up off the ground.

Unless, you know, you like "stick of truth" jokes...

[Story]

There is no going rate though. That's part of what makes price evaluations difficult.

[ericgrau]

24 hour abilities are priced rather expensive for good reason. You can use them automatically and are pretty much immune to illusions, invisibility and so on, which are major mechanics. You can use 24 hour items in general to go through areas they apply to and disable them for multiple others, or to help multiple others in general depending on the item.

If you only intend to use an ability part of the day instead of abusing it 1,000 times a day then you might wonder why all day long is so expensive. In that case you should get a limited use item. Each 1/day as a standard action should be 9*5*1800/5=16,200 gp. If you want it as a swift action because you only wanted to respond to something fishy not abuse it all day long then it's 17*9*1800/5=55,080 gp per 1/day. If you only want it for combat purposes then you're unlikely to use it more than once, so I suggest the 55k gp version of the item to meet your budget.

But if you aren't constantly fighting visual problems, you can take the money savings even further. A single use swift item of the above would be 17*9*50=7,650 gp per use. You may be saying wow I'm throwing away thousands every time I use it. But actually D&D challenges are incredibly short, and you might not use it 8 times in the entire campaign so you save money. It has the added bonus of letting you use it 2-3 times in a day when you enter the tomb of illusionary illusionness, and 0 times all the other days. The standard action version is 9*5*50=2,250 gp. Which is more affordable for puzzles & traps but I suggest swift for combat.

As part of a staff it's a good deal cheaper which is why staffs are so amazingly underrated. Every level 13+ caster or gish should have a staff, and earlier if your DM ignores the little known max 25% WBL expendable rule. Or if you make it yourself or find one. Even paying more for multiple spells on a staff you're still saving a lot of money and you get more versatility without blowing time on item swapping. Plus 50 charges is way too many for one spell. Remember how I just explained why 8 is often too many. I often make spells cost as many charges as I can get away with too, to reduce the cost. But not so many that I feel guilty about it. So 2 or 3 to match existing staffs.

So that's why permanent stuff is so crazy expensive in D&D. Going temporary, yet effectively all you will ever need, to save money is practically expected by the system. If you say all day the system assumes omg he's going to use it 2,000 times a day and prices accordingly. The drawback to this approach is that it requires complicated planning to predict what you'll need, and most don't even think to try. It might be interesting if there was some kind of simpler gem dust fueled pay-as-you-go plan instead.