Armor resize question

[TheDarkSaint]

I've got a player who plays a gnome. The party found some +1 mythrial breast plate armor sized for a medium creature. He'd like to have it resized down to a small size

Are there any rules on this?

[Slipperychicken]

Well, here's what the SRD has to say about it:


Size And Magic Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm#sizeAndMagicItems)
When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn’t be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.

There may be rare exceptions, especially with racial specific items.

So magic items in D&D are kind of like the One Ring from LOTR, in that they magically change size to fit on any wearer. You'll want to assume the size change is an instantaneous (or non-magical) effect, so you don't get your neck broken when you walk into an AMF wearing a torc made for pixies.

[TheDarkSaint]

Perfect, thank you very much :)

[TrueJordan]

So why are there different prices for different armor sizes? Just buy the smallest one and put it on, and it'll re-size straight for you.

Rather, I think it's talking specifically about magic items, not magically enhanced armor. which you'd have to buy separately and I'd have no idea how to resize it.

That said, you're the DM, do whatcha want.

[Deophaun]

So magic items in D&D are kind of like the One Ring from LOTR, in that they magically change size to fit on any wearer.
First, let's highlight a different part of your quote:

When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn’t be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.
Next, let's look at the section that immediately follows what you quoted:

Armor and Weapon Sizes

Armor and weapons that are found at random have a 30% chance of being Small (01-30), a 60% chance of being Medium (31-90), and a 10% chance of being any other size (91-100).
So, no. There's no magic resizing for armor. It's only there for wondrous items. The fact that there's pricing differences between small and large armors, but not small and large cloaks of charisma, should be a clue.

[some guy]

I've always wondered why there was no 'resize item'-spell. Maybe second or third level, with a material component cost dependent of the amount of size categories (max 3) and with a duration of 'Instantaneous'. Most of the magic-using npc's in my world are able to cast that spell.

[Bronk]

There is a cantrip in Dragon 302 called Resize, that changes the size of any non magical item. The 'dispel magic' spell can temporarily nullify a magic items magic.

You could have your player find someone (a wizard, magic shop or well connected armory), pay them a nominal fee, and have them fix it for them using those two spells or something similar.

[WrathMage]

See I always assumed that the magic resize thing applied to armour, but on closer reading up thread it looks like I learned something new today!

[Fouredged Sword]

See, I would just make the a spell called magical transference that takes the enchantments from one item and applies them to a completely non-magical item. Make it take an hour to cast and it completely destroys the original object. Want the cool enchanted ax you just found to be a long sword, ok that's fine. Need that armor in small and or a different material, also fine. Make it transmutation and place it at 2-3rd level or so.

[RedMage125]

I've always ruled that magical armor designed for creatures of the same "build" (i.e. humanoid, centaur-like, etc.) would re-size, but weapons do not (otherwise, no one can wield oversized weapons with Monkey Grip).

So the +1 Mithril Breastplate would automatically resize for a gnome, but not for a centaur.

But +1 Mithril Fullplate for a Bariaur (Medium sized) would be useless to a human, but would re-size for a centaur.

That's how I run things anyway. A DM is within his/her rights to rule how the want.

Best DM advice I ever heard given to another is this:

"Remember that it is both a game and a story. When the two conflict, err on the side of cool, your players will thank you for it."

I consider game balance to be an important factor. If you've introduced the +1 mithril breastplate as treasure, I can only assume you considered it ok for the players to have it. Does it-in any way-ruin game balance for a gnome character (as opposed to a Medium-race character) to have it? If not, then let it resize. What's the harm?

[Slipperychicken]

See I always assumed that the magic resize thing applied to armour, but on closer reading up thread it looks like I learned something new today!

I think it's reasonable to apply the rule to armor. The same logic is there: characters shouldn't be restricted from using magic items due to size.

[lytokk]

See, I would just make the a spell called magical transference that takes the enchantments from one item and applies them to a completely non-magical item. Make it take an hour to cast and it completely destroys the original object. Want the cool enchanted ax you just found to be a long sword, ok that's fine. Need that armor in small and or a different material, also fine. Make it transmutation and place it at 2-3rd level or so.

That actually makes a whole lot of sense. I think I'll go ahead and run with this in my game. Of course, adding in the caveat that the magic transfer has to be done with items of the same body slot.

[Fouredged Sword]

I would go ahead and add on a clause that the item must be of the same "type" and occupy the same slot. You can change a cloak to another cloak (this cloak of resistance +5 is great, too bad it has the flag of my hated enemy on the back), a weapon to another weapon (I want this longsword enchantment on an ax), ect. The new item must be able to be enchanted with all transferred enchantment (must be masterwork if a weapon or armor, ect). Any enchantments that are attempted to be transferred to an item that cannot hold them are lost. The caster of the spell knows what enchantments will be kept and what will be lost 10min into the spell, and can choose to stop the process at that point, with no magic transferred and no items destroyed. A spellcaster who attempts to transfer the enchantments on an item he has not identified must make a CL check equal to the CL of the item or fail to transfer the enchantment. This destroys the item that the caster intended to move the magic to, leaving the original intact. When attempting to transfer unknown or hidden enhancements, the spellcaster is informed that there is magic he does not recognize being moved only if it will be lost in the transfer, and even then, he only knows that magic will be lost, not it's nature.

This spell changes the physical object the magic is transferred to in a way that provides hints as to the new nature of the object. The item will gain all new features needed to function in it's new role, as well as features that hint at it's function. A necklace with an necklace of fireballs effect move to it will grow beads that can be removed and thrown. A flaming sword will grow a flame decal along the blade. The caster can suppress cosmetic (sword decal), but not functional (beads for a necklace of fireballs), changes with a caster level check with a DC equal to the caster level of the item. If he succeed the caster level check he can control or suppress the cosmetic changes. No change will be enough to disguise the item as something else, and it remains recognizable as the old object by anyone who studies the object (DC 10 knowledge arcane or relevant profession or craft check).

That would work as a more complete text.

[TuggyNE]

I would go ahead and add on a clause that the item must be of the same "type" and occupy the same slot. You can change a cloak to another cloak (this cloak of resistance +5 is great, too bad it has the flag of my hated enemy on the back), a weapon to another weapon (I want this longsword enchantment on an ax), ect. The new item must be able to be enchanted with all transferred enchantment (must be masterwork if a weapon or armor, ect). Any enchantments that are attempted to be transferred to an item that cannot hold them are lost. The caster of the spell knows what enchantments will be kept and what will be lost 10min into the spell, and can choose to stop the process at that point, with no magic transferred and no items destroyed. A spellcaster who attempts to transfer the enchantments on an item he has not identified must make a CL check equal to the CL of the item or fail to transfer the enchantment. This destroys the item that the caster intended to move the magic to, leaving the original intact. When attempting to transfer unknown or hidden enhancements, the spellcaster is informed that there is magic he does not recognize being moved only if it will be lost in the transfer, and even then, he only knows that magic will be lost, not it's nature.

This spell changes the physical object the magic is transferred to in a way that provides hints as to the new nature of the object. The item will gain all new features needed to function in it's new role, as well as features that hint at it's function. A necklace with an necklace of fireballs effect move to it will grow beads that can be removed and thrown. A flaming sword will grow a flame decal along the blade. The caster can suppress cosmetic (sword decal), but not functional (beads for a necklace of fireballs), changes with a caster level check with a DC equal to the caster level of the item. If he succeed the caster level check he can control or suppress the cosmetic changes. No change will be enough to disguise the item as something else, and it remains recognizable as the old object by anyone who studies the object (DC 10 knowledge arcane or relevant profession or craft check).

That would work as a more complete text.

You want to write this up in Homebrew Design, or shall I?

[Andezzar]

I've always ruled that magical armor designed for creatures of the same "build" (i.e. humanoid, centaur-like, etc.) would re-size, but weapons do not (otherwise, no one can wield oversized weapons with Monkey Grip).While this is a reasonable houserule, unfortunately the rules tie the armor design to creature types, not body shapes. So tieflings or aasimars could not wear armor for humanoids, but armor taken off a xorn

[Fouredged Sword]

You want to write this up in Homebrew Design, or shall I?

You can do it if you like. I have never had much luck with starting conversations on the Homebrew forum.

EDIT on the language of the above -

Change


The new item must be able to be enchanted with all transferred enchantment (must be masterwork if a weapon or armor, ect). Any enchantments that are attempted to be transferred to an item that cannot hold them are lost.

to


The new item need not be able to be enchanted with all transferred enchantment, but any enchantments that are attempted to be transferred to an item that cannot hold them are lost. Attempting to move a weapon or armor enchantment to a non-masterwork weapon or armor, for example, would do nothing but destroy the original enchanted item because the new item cannot hold any form of enchantment at all.

[TuggyNE]

You can do it if you like.

Done!


EDIT on the language of the above -

Change



to

Check the current wording in the linked thread and see if you think the change is still necessary.