PDA

View Full Version : Ring of Cure Light Wounds



ObsidianRose
2007-04-21, 10:22 PM
One of my very difficult players wants one. Claims that he can get an unslotted charm of cure light wounds level 1 with unlimited use for 4000 gold, which the party can at the moment afford. How can I tell him off without the obvious no? Is this even RAW legal?

Ramza00
2007-04-21, 10:25 PM
Custom Items are guidelines made to aid the DM with determining how much the item will cost.

A player can't just make the item if he wants it, he can make it if the DM okays it. This is how custom items work.

Some of the custom item forumlas don't work well for certain spells.

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-21, 10:26 PM
Ask him to crunch the numbers for the cost of a use activated ring of true strike.

Then show him the part in the DMG where crafting is totally up to the DM, and the rules are actually guidelines.

Armads
2007-04-21, 10:31 PM
It is legal by the RAW, but you can tell him to take the Tomb-Tainted Soul feat and constantly wear/use the ring while lacking protection from positive energy. Alternatively, you could throw enemies at him with the same ring.:smalltongue:

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-21, 10:37 PM
It is legal by the RAW, but you can tell him to take the Tomb-Tainted Soul feat and constantly wear/use the ring while lacking protection from positive energy. Alternatively, you could throw enemies at him with the same ring.:smalltongue:

No, it's not legal by RAW, as there are no rules that exist for custom items. There are guidelines.

Furthermore, there are items that exist that don't follow the guidelines. Crunch the numbers on wings of flying, for instance. According to the guidelines, they're overpriced.

Douglas
2007-04-21, 10:37 PM
As mentioned above, remind him that the formula he used is strictly a guideline and the rules specifically require explicit DM approval. Also point out that one unstated but (almost) universally obeyed rule for non-custom items is that duplicating a spell with instantaneous duration should never have unlimited uses. The only two exceptions in core that I am aware of are the Ring of Telekinesis (instantaneous application is normally useful only in combat and requires an action) and Amulet of the Planes (unreliable and risky until very high levels). Give it either charges or uses per day and it should be fine.

Ashlan
2007-04-21, 10:38 PM
This was just discussed.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41417

The first step in determining the cost of a magic item is to compare it to a similar item. The closest thing to a ring that casts unlimited cure light wounds is a ring of regeneration, which costs (iirc) 20k and heals 1hp per level per hour. So at level 20, it would heal 20hp per hour. A ring of that casts cure light wounds, on average heals 4.5 (avg d8) x 10 (rnds per minute) x 60 (minutes per hour) or 2700 hp per hour; which is 135 times more than a ring of regeneration. Now, it does use your action for each round so it shouldn't really be 135 times more expensive, but that would be 2.7 million. Even if you were to make it 1/10 that for the fact that it uses an action, it ain't happening for many people until quite late in the game. 'The rules', which every newbie and powergamer, are the guidelines that the DM is supposed to use if an item does not have a similar item to compare it to.

(See pg 282. "Many factors must be considered when determining the price of magic items you invent. The easierst way to come up with a price is to match the new item to an item priced in this chapter and use its price as a guide. Otherwise, use the guidelines summarized on Table 7-33: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values.", also, the final line in this page is key "Use good sense when assigning prices, using the items in this book as examples.")

Douglas
2007-04-21, 10:40 PM
Furthermore, there are items that exist that don't follow the guidelines. Crunch the numbers on wings of flying, for instance. According to the guidelines, they're overpriced.
Actually, Wings of Flying follow the guidelines exactly. The reason they're so expensive is that someone decided to give them twice the minimum caster level for no apparent reason, doubling the price.

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-21, 10:55 PM
Actually, Wings of Flying follow the guidelines exactly. The reason they're so expensive is that someone decided to give them twice the minimum caster level for no apparent reason, doubling the price.

If they followed the guidelines, wouldn't they follow the guidelines?

Douglas
2007-04-21, 11:04 PM
Wings of Flying: a level 3 spell (Fly) at caster level 10 activated by command word costs 3 * 10 * 1800 = 54000 gp, which happens to be exactly the listed price for the item. There is very little reason to have the caster level at 10 rather than 5, but that's what WotC decided to set it at for their official version so that's the number used in the formula.

tsuyoshikentsu
2007-04-21, 11:08 PM
This is RAW.

So is Mordenkainen's Disjunction.

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-21, 11:40 PM
Wings of Flying: a level 3 spell (Fly) at caster level 10 activated by command word costs 3 * 10 * 1800 = 54000 gp, which happens to be exactly the listed price for the item.

Oh, yeah, ok, I gotcha.


There is very little reason to have the caster level at 10 rather than 5, but that's what WotC decided to set it at for their official version so that's the number used in the formula.

For power reasons, I'd think.

Yuki Akuma
2007-04-22, 04:30 AM
This is RAW.

No it isn't.

Anyway, just make it an intelligent item with the lesser power of Cure Light Wounds. If you want to be nice, you could also give the ring another power... and if you want to be mean, give it an obscene ego score.

Closet_Skeleton
2007-04-22, 05:44 AM
No it isn't.

Anyway, just make it an intelligent item with the lesser power of Cure Light Wounds. If you want to be nice, you could also give the ring another power... and if you want to be mean, give it an obscene ego score.

Yeah, and then the ring could refuse to cure its wearer and force him to see Mr. Sauron...

bosssmiley
2007-04-22, 07:21 AM
This is RAW.

So is Mordenkainen's Disjunction.

Ah, sweet blessed Disjunction: the gear-specific "rocks fall, everyone dies, do not anger the GM" clause. Even the *threat* of using it is enough to persuade most players that they've strayed into the realms of bad taste and dirty brokenness. :smallamused:

JellyPooga
2007-04-22, 07:29 AM
Ah, sweet blessed Disjunction: the gear-specific "rocks fall, everyone dies, do not anger the GM" clause. Even the *threat* of using it is enough to persuade most players that they've strayed into the realms of bad taste and dirty brokenness. :smallamused:

My DM of old used to use it on a whim. He'd give us a bunch of new stuff and spend ages going through books, explaining what it does to everyone as we take the time to ID it (a good half hour or more, real time). Then Disjunction it all to buggery without warning about 5 minutes later. Then again, his idea of a good session was a TPK...every session in an ongoing campaign (he felt he'd failed if he hadn't killed of at least 1 PC every sesh.)

Stephen_E
2007-04-22, 08:37 AM
Continous effect items duplicating a spell require the spell have a duration. Cure Light Wounds is instantaneous, therefore no go.
You can make it with "x" charges, or "x" uses per day.
Vigor spells, on the otherhand, do have durations, and thus can be done this way. It would be 8000gp as a slotted item that healed 1 hp per rd. While this is faster then the Ring of Regen, it doesn't regrow limbs ecetre. It would also have the difficulty of finding a Druid who has the appropriate crafting feat, and is willing to do it for the party. A epic adventure on its own (when did you last see a Druid take a crafting feat).

As others have noted, it should always be remembered that custom built items are by GM fiat. The Guidelines are for how the GM should handle it IF HE DECIDES TO ALLOW THE ITEM.

Stephen

PinkysBrain
2007-04-22, 09:09 AM
The first step in determining the cost of a magic item is to compare it to a similar item.
No, the first step is to ask your DM :)

Personally I'd allow a continuous item of lesser vigor using the guidelines, but not an infinite/day item of CLW (I dislike infinite charges per day items). Out of combat healing is overrated, if you play in a game with default wealth guidelines hitpoints are NOT an expensive resource. Wands of CLW/LV cost next to nothing.

Stephen_E
2007-04-22, 09:24 AM
Wands of LV totally own Wands of CLW.

Wand of LV = 750gp for 550 hps of healing
Wand of CLW = 750gp for 275 hps of healing, on average. Range 100hps - 450 hps.

Hell, even in combat I'd rather take a guaranteed 1 hp/rd for 11 rounds over a oneshot 1d8+1 in 90%+ situations.

Stephen

reorith
2007-04-22, 09:28 AM
1. let the player have it
2. use some kind of creature with a ridiculous death attack
3. ???
4. profit

Roderick_BR
2007-04-22, 11:51 AM
Easy. Tell him that custom itens need to be DM approved, and you don't like how it turned out because you think it's unbalanced. Be honest about it.
A ring that can heal the whole party in a few minutes after a combat? Too good to be allowed.

Corolinth
2007-04-22, 12:04 PM
Secretly assign the ring a number of charges without telling him. He pays 4,000gp for a caster level 1 wand of cure light wounds (which costs 750gp). Problem solved.

Erom
2007-04-22, 02:09 PM
Secretly assign the ring a number of charges without telling him. He pays 4,000gp for a caster level 1 wand of cure light wounds (which costs 750gp). Problem solved.
Um, this would be a really cruel solution, but it would work.

Myself, I'd just say "No infinite charge instaneous cast items." Give it a cooldown or an X cast per day, or you can't have it.

That way, you can at least plan on it when designing the rest of the campaign.

Corolinth
2007-04-22, 02:38 PM
My solution teaches a very valuable lesson to players: Prick rules lawyers don't get lube.

Indon
2007-04-22, 02:53 PM
My solution teaches a very valuable lesson to players: Prick rules lawyers don't get lube.

You could do that just as well by having the party fight a larcenous monk with Gloves of Slay Living, use-activated of course, on their next encounter.

And after the monk kills the party, he gets to keep the ring.

Or you could just bring up that possibility with the player in question and he should fall in line.

Corolinth
2007-04-22, 03:37 PM
That means they're dead, and don't have to suffer the consequences of their actions, or care about being ripped off for 3,000gp.

You guys are really going overboard and overthinking this. Gloves of slay living would allow a fortitude save, and the monk could be defeated, which would give your players said gloves. Mordenkainen's Disjunction and powerful enemies with death attacks are horribly contrived, and either can fail by a miraculous stroke of blind luck. You have to just keep it simple.

kamikasei
2007-04-22, 03:44 PM
Lying to your player about the capabilities of a custom item they're buying accomplishes... what? If a player wants something that you don't want in the game, tell them you don't want it. Explain why (optional, but a good idea). In this case, make it very clear that players don't get to create custom items without DM approval.

It's an out-of-game issue - he wants you to allow something in the game that is unbalanced. It should be resolved out of game - by explaining that it's unbalanced and you're not going to allow it. It should not be resolved by pulling a bait-and-switch of telling him it's one thing and secretly treating it as another.

Corolinth
2007-04-22, 04:31 PM
Well, if they're buying it, it potentially sets up a plot to hunt down the cheating bastard that sold it to them. That's an opening to months of gaming fun. This, of course, assumes you're running a D&D campaign with some semblance of an actual plot, instead of 3rd edition Hackmaster. They really don't need to go any further than that. The person they bought it from cheated them, that becomes the new plotline, and the con artist becomes a somewhat major villain who's scamming lots of other victims. When they finally bring him to justice, the rewards far outweigh the money they were ripped out of, and they're lauded as heroes. In the process, the group should hopefully get a general idea that they need to be a bit more reasonable about the custom magic items they want to buy.

Now if it's a custom item the character crafted himself, then you're teaching him an object lesson that every player needs to learn at some point. Other systems handle item creation in such a way as to require some sort of roll before the item is successfully made, and there are still chances of the item breaking later when it's used. D&D doesn't do this. A large number of D&D players, especially those who spend a lot of time on message boards revolving around online comics pertaining to D&D, think that item creation feats are the one-way ticket to min/max munchkinland. This is an issue that can sometimes be dealt with in a one-on-one chat about what is and is not appropriate for the campaign, but all too often, the idea does not sink in until something goes horribly wrong.

This player knows the unlimited charge cure light wounds item is too powerful, that's why he wants it. That's why he's pointing out it's in their price range. When it burns out on him, and he complains, that's when the DM turns to him and asks, "Did you really think I was allowing an item with unlimited daily uses of healing?" This player is trying to find a loophole in the rules to get an advantage without technically "cheating," and he's well aware that's what he's doing.

But upon rereading the original post, they're still at the stage where the DM hasn't given an answer one way or the other. I'd say just flat out tell him no. Give the player a chance to drop it. If he then decides to push, or tries to bully you into letting him have the item, then you cut loose with the evil. Unless of course you like the idea of the scam artist minicampaign I presented in the first paragraph - that works best if you don't give them any warning (although the ring should fizzle out within the next two gaming sessions if you want to set that plot up).

Rama_Lei
2007-04-22, 04:35 PM
This is RAW.

So is Mordenkainen's Disjunction.
RAW? THIS! IS! HOMEBREW!

Really, there are now specific rules for these kind of things, so you have to trust your instincts.

my_evil_twin
2007-04-22, 04:40 PM
Economics is key here. Ignoring what the DMG says a thing should cost, what would you pay for it? That's what merchants will charge for it, and that's the base cost.

Ask yourself, "Would I want a Ring of Cure Light Wounds or Gloves of Dexterity +2?" Then go to a more expensive thing. "Would I rather have Wings of Flying or the ability to completely heal my entire party after every encounter?"

If you get to "Would I rather have a Ring of Cure Light Wounds or the Hand of Vecna?" stop and smite the player with a rolled up newspaper.

Solo
2007-04-22, 04:49 PM
Give him a Ring of Cure Light Wounds.

"Ooops! The merchant cheated you! Too bad!"

kamikasei
2007-04-22, 04:58 PM
In the process, the group should hopefully get a general idea that they need to be a bit more reasonable about the custom magic items they want to buy.

I can only say that I strongly oppose using in-game means to resolve an out-of-game issue. For a player to seek something unbalancing from the DM, and the DM to then grant it (or seem to), only to punish his character for having it, does not communicate that "some items are unbalanced for their price per the guidelines, and shouldn't be sought". It says "the DM is overly adversarial and will flat-out lie to both characters and players". This is not a message you want to send.


D&D doesn't do this. A large number of D&D players, especially those who spend a lot of time on message boards revolving around online comics pertaining to D&D, think that item creation feats are the one-way ticket to min/max munchkinland.

Do you have any specific examples in mind? Most threads I see here about custom magic items are asking "is this balanced?" and being answered with "no". I've seen


This is an issue that can sometimes be dealt with in a one-on-one chat about what is and is not appropriate for the campaign, but all too often, the idea does not sink in until something goes horribly wrong.

What needs to "sink in"? The item doesn't exist until the DM okays it. The DM just has to not okay it. The only lesson that needs to be taught, the point that needs to be conveyed, is if you want a custom item, you ask me for it, and I might refuse.


This player knows the unlimited charge cure light wounds item is too powerful, that's why he wants it. That's why he's pointing out it's in their price range. When it burns out on him, and he complains, that's when the DM turns to him and asks, "Did you really think I was allowing an item with unlimited daily uses of healing?" This player is trying to find a loophole in the rules to get an advantage without technically "cheating," and he's well aware that's what he's doing.

The player may be aware that the item creation guidelines are not hard-and-fast rules and may be trying to browbeat a DM who doesn't know better. On the other hand, he may just have taken a look at the rules, gone "holy crap, you can do that?" and asked his DM for a powerful but rules-legal (as he understands it) item. It's the DM's job to point out that the item is not rules-legal and to tell the player, "no". Telling the player, "yes... AHA! Gotcha, stupid!" is not a good strategy. It weakens the main point (nothing is allowed by default; I have to approve everything) and creates animosity to boot.


But upon rereading the original post, they're still at the stage where the DM hasn't given an answer one way or the other. I'd say just flat out tell him no. Give the player a chance to drop it. If he then decides to push, or tries to bully you into letting him have the item, then you cut loose with the evil.

The DM has final say on any matter of custom item creation - and not via Rule Zero; that's just how the rules for items work, they require adjudication. If a player can't accept the DM's authority in this area then he shouldn't be playing with that DM (and probably shouldn't be playing, period). Keeping a player in your game who won't abide by your rulings is a waste of everyone's time. You shouldn't have to resort to "the evil" - just ask the guy to leave.

ObsidianRose: Others have explained the rules behind this. The item creation guidelines are guidelines, not rules. The item in question is far too good for the guideline price. My advice is to explain to the player that you have to approve any custom item, and that the price is liable to be much higher than the guideline if the item is extremely good. Keep this all out of the game. It's a question of the rules and should be settled between DM and player, not character and world.

Stephen_E
2007-04-22, 07:30 PM
Couple of points.

1) The item been requested isn't legal by the guidelines. The guidelines are abusable, but that's not what's happening here. The guidelines aren't been followed. Continous items duplicating spell effects can only duplicate spells with durations. Continous item costs are based on spell lev, caster lev, constant (2000gp) and duration modifier. Any item that doesn't meet these requirements can't be continous.

2) As Kamikasei say, using in game manipulations in responce to out of game questions is a bad idea. Most of the ideas along this line simply encourage the players to cheat or hoodwink the GM. One of few things that really pissed me off, re:a GM, was when I went to the GM and said "My MysticTheurge would like to take the feat "Wild Cohort" and get a Dire Wolverine. Would this be OK." The GM said fine. After several levels later, with no opportunity to gain my Dire Wolverine Cohort it turned out that the GM had decided at the time he didn't like it and simply wasn't going to give it to me. What did I learn? I learnt that the GM was a lying <insert derogatory term>. If a player asks for something for their PC out of game you either say yes, and give it to them, or no. and don't give it to them. You don't say yes, pretend to give it to them, and then cheat, because that's exactly what people are suggesting, GM cheating.

Stephen

I_Got_This_Name
2007-04-22, 07:47 PM
I'll second pointing out that those rules are guidelines for DMs to price items, not hard-and-fast rules for players to make what they want.

Also, Disjoining it implies that it was valid in the first place.

ObsidianRose
2007-04-22, 08:12 PM
I've told him and he won't listen. So, I'm gonna have some dirt farmers (totally not lamia) hold a garage sale selling them. And they'll bundle in with it a ring of greater invisibility. Oh and it raises oyur sense motive. With his new clarity, he'll realize everyone wants it and the only way to escape is to go east.

kamikasei
2007-04-22, 08:31 PM
I've told him and he won't listen.

What do you mean? If you've told the player no, this item doesn't exist in the game, and can't, what does "he won't listen" translate into? He's not required to listen - the item simply isn't there, can't be found, and can't be made.

If he is totally hung up on this and throwing tantrums, refusing to play, acting badly in whatever way in-game, etc - well, I'd ask myself whether a player so incapable of abiding by a (totally fair and by-the-rules) DM ruling is worth playing with at all.

ObsidianRose
2007-04-22, 08:35 PM
Well, I feel bad for the kid, since he gets picked on pretty often at school, since he skipped two grades and is quite a bit less mature than most people in our group. So, I know he does his best to be a good cooperative player, helping to pay a good amount on things and generally making efforts, he just doesn't realize that this disrupts play and it's hard to tell him things.

tsuyoshikentsu
2007-04-22, 10:03 PM
RAW? THIS! IS! HOMEBREW!

"An' finally: tha Magic Item rules're more like... guidelines, anyway!"

First off, this is legal by the "guidelines." (Whatever.) For Wondrous Items, the entry for Use-Activated or Continuous items states:

Spell level x Caster level x 2,000 GP

So as a Standard Action, the guy can use his 2,000 GP ring to heal himself.

Now, what I really meant by bringing up MDJ was this: this item would drastically increase his character's power. If he's using powerful things, you're going to use powerful things to counter it. The BBEG would be stupid not to.

Mewtarthio
2007-04-22, 10:34 PM
Well, if they're buying it, it potentially sets up a plot to hunt down the cheating bastard that sold it to them. That's an opening to months of gaming fun. This, of course, assumes you're running a D&D campaign with some semblance of an actual plot, instead of 3rd edition Hackmaster. They really don't need to go any further than that. The person they bought it from cheated them, that becomes the new plotline, and the con artist becomes a somewhat major villain who's scamming lots of other victims. When they finally bring him to justice, the rewards far outweigh the money they were ripped out of, and they're lauded as heroes. In the process, the group should hopefully get a general idea that they need to be a bit more reasonable about the custom magic items they want to buy.

"Excuse me, kind sir, I kill slaughter sentient beings in large numbers for fun and profit. Do you perchance have some sort of device that can heal me, so that I may kill more of abovesaid beings?"
Hmm... This looks like exactly the kind of guy whom I should tick off by selling a fake amulet of healing!

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-22, 10:36 PM
"Excuse me, kind sir, I kill slaughter sentient beings in large numbers for fun and profit. Do you perchance have some sort of device that can heal me, so that I may kill more of abovesaid beings?"
Hmm... This looks like exactly the kind of guy whom I should tick off by selling a fake amulet of healing!

I've always assumed the people selling magic items
a) put a good amount of the money into security
b) are likely high level casters, as they meet the requirements to craft magic stuff.

BardicDuelist
2007-04-22, 10:47 PM
I actually made a ring of Cure Light Wounds which had unlimited uses, but I did make it an intelligent item with an abscene ego score (16 INT 24 WIS 20 CHA). I also mad it a pacifist. It refused to heal people who had fought on the offensive and would drain 1d6 Cha from the wearer every time it attacked (Will DC 18 for half).
And creation costs are guidelines, which I feel the need to reiterate.

SMDVogrin
2007-04-22, 11:33 PM
I've told him and he won't listen. So, I'm gonna have some dirt farmers (totally not lamia) hold a garage sale selling them. And they'll bundle in with it a ring of greater invisibility. Oh and it raises oyur sense motive. With his new clarity, he'll realize everyone wants it and the only way to escape is to go east.

No, you have a merchant selling one. And you base the price on a Wand of Cure Light wounds (with a little extra cost for the fact that non-casters can activate it). And you keep track of how many times he uses it, and after 50 charges are expended, it don't work no more. And if he whines, remind him of the phrase "Caveat Emptor".

Stephen_E
2007-04-22, 11:46 PM
"An' finally: tha Magic Item rules're more like... guidelines, anyway!"

First off, this is legal by the "guidelines." (Whatever.) For Wondrous Items, the entry for Use-Activated or Continuous items states:

Spell level x Caster level x 2,000 GP

So as a Standard Action, the guy can use his 2,000 GP ring to heal himself.

Now, what I really meant by bringing up MDJ was this: this item would drastically increase his character's power. If he's using powerful things, you're going to use powerful things to counter it. The BBEG would be stupid not to.

You missed the footnote subscript on the equation. The footnote makes it clear that this is designed for spells with a duration of hours*CL, and modifys the price for shorter and longer durations.

Stephen

Demented
2007-04-22, 11:49 PM
Two 2000gp rings of CLW 5/day would do him nicely. Though, if he wants to heal the entire party, he may need some heavier firepower....


Decanter of Endless Cure Potions
If the stopper is removed from this crystal flask and a command word spoken, an amount of healing potion fluid pours out. Separate command words determine the type as well as the volume and velocity.

* "Stream" pours out 1 Cure Minor Wounds per round.
* "Fountain" produces a 5-foot-long stream at 3 Cure Minor Wounds per round.
* "Geyser" produces a 20-foot-long, 1-foot-wide stream at 15 Cure Minor Wounds per round.

The geyser effect causes considerable back pressure, requiring the holder to make a DC 12 Strength check to avoid being knocked down. The force of the geyser deals 1d4 points of damage but can only affect one target per round. The command word must be spoken to stop it.

Strong conjuration; CL 15th; Craft Wondrous Item, cure serious wounds; Price 900,000 gp; Weight 2 lb.

tsuyoshikentsu
2007-04-23, 12:37 AM
You missed the footnote subscript on the equation. The footnote makes it clear that this is designed for spells with a duration of hours*CL, and modifys the price for shorter and longer durations.

The footnote applies to Continuous items only. It merely happens that Use-Activated and continuous items are priced the same way.

Stephen_E
2007-04-23, 07:43 AM
The footnote applies to Continuous items only. It merely happens that Use-Activated and continuous items are priced the same way.

Sorry but I don't think the RAW supports that.
If you look at pg 213 "Use activated" is merely a indication of how you start the item operating. "Use Activated" can be a continous item, ala Ring of Jumping, or a single shot, ala potion of healing.
Its use in table 7-33 as regarding continous items is somewhat confusing, but as the errata has stated, when text and tables conflict, the text takes presidence. So given the text from pg 213 the table should read Use Activated continous items (no "or").

Stephen

Emperor Tippy
2007-04-23, 07:59 AM
Use Activated is an item that can be used an unlimited number of tiems per day. You are wrong Stephen.

A use-activated item of CLW, per the GUIDELINES in the DMG, costs 2,000 GP. 4,000 GP if you want it unslotted.

The item is worth far more than that though and I would price it at around 200,000 GP or more.

Now if you don't have a healing cleric and need a replacement give the party a ring of heal (CL 20) with as many daily charges as their are party members +1. So for a 4 person party it would have 5 charges per day. Restrict it to party members only in some way (such as the quest to get it links the ring to the party and no one else can use it without going through an attunment quest and only X number of people can ever be linked to the ring at any given time.

That ring allows a full heal for everyone in the party each day and gives 1 emergency heal if needed. It can't be sold because it is worthless to everyone else and if a character is replaced it can be attuned to the new person.

Jayabalard
2007-04-23, 08:18 AM
Well, I feel bad for the kid, since he gets picked on pretty often at school, since he skipped two grades and is quite a bit less mature than most people in our group. consider this a valuable learning experience for him; Tell him "No you can't have the item; those are guidelines only, not rules. It does not exist in the game world, and cannot be made."

Bender
2007-04-23, 08:30 AM
I think this is rather easy

player in ye old magic shop: Do you have a ring of cure light wounds
shop owner: never heard of it
player: I mean a continuous healing ring
(option 1: shop owner sells him a ring that grants a continuous +5 bonus to the skill heal)
Shop owner: nope, doesn't ring a bell, maybe somewhere else?

player rolls a gather knowledge to find someone who sells this ring
if he rolls good: he finds a very old and wise wizard who can tell him that, although very powerful beings tried, no one ever succeeded in making a ring like that.
if he rolls poorly: in a dark and gloomy street, far away from the rich merchant neighbourhood, he finds a very dark and gloomy person who hides his face and is willing to sell him this ring, then give him either the ring with the bonus to heal, a ring with a limited amount of charges, or just an ordinary fake golden ring...

Try to avoid ever calling it a ring of cure light wounds yourself. After the game, explain him the rules for custom items and why it doesn't exist

Telonius
2007-04-23, 08:36 AM
If the player is really being obnoxious about it, fine, let him do it. The players all have them. Unfortunately, so do all of the enemies they're going to face. Because really, if these things only cost 4k, everyone who could afford one would get one.

Jayabalard
2007-04-23, 08:46 AM
If the player is really being obnoxious about it, fine, let him do it. The players all have them. Unfortunately, so do all of the enemies they're going to face. Because really, if these things only cost 4k, everyone who could afford one would get one.Personally, I think that this is something a GM should avoid at all costs... out of game problems call for out of game solutions.

MusScribe
2007-04-23, 08:54 AM
Well, thinking about what it does: Allows you to cast Cure Light Wounds each standard action, this might work:

A use-activated item (while wearing): Base Price = 1 (spell level) * X (caster level) * 2,000 gp * 4 (lenient on duration measured in rounds) = 8,000gp * caster level

Charges per day (allowing for 1/round for a whole day): Base Price / (5 / 14,400 (# of rounds/day)) = Base Price / (.0003472...) = 23,040,000gp * caster level / (5/14,400)

Charges per day (allowing for 1/round for 8 hours): Base Price / (5 / 4,800) = 7,680,000gp * caster level / (5/4,800)

So, assuming I'm right, and you go for the minimum caster level:

{table=head]Type|Healing Rate|8 hour charges|24 hour charges|8 hour cost|24 hour cost

Minor |1d8+1/round|4,800/day|14,400/day|6,785,280,000 gp|66,355,200,000 gp

Lesser |1d8+2/round|4,800/day|14,400/day|13,570,560,000 gp|132,710,400,000 gp

Standard |1d8+3/round|4,800/day|14,400/day|20,355,840,000 gp|199,065,600,000 gp

Greater |1d8+4/round|4,800/day|14,400/day|27,141,120,000 gp|265,420,800,000 gp

Major |1d8+5/round|4,800/day|14,400/day|33,926,400,000 gp|331,776,000,000 gp

[/table]

Honestly, I think that the 8 hour would have way more than needed to get by. For a party, maybe not, but still at a cost of rougly 7 billion for the weakest version...

Indon
2007-04-23, 08:54 AM
* "Geyser" produces a 20-foot-long, 1-foot-wide stream at 15 Cure Minor Wounds per round.

The geyser effect causes considerable back pressure, requiring the holder to make a DC 12 Strength check to avoid being knocked down. The force of the geyser deals 1d4 points of damage but can only affect one target per round. The command word must be spoken to stop it.


It _deals_ 1d4, but _heals_ 15...

Potions can be applied to wounds to heal them, right?

Bender
2007-04-23, 08:58 AM
If the player is really being obnoxious about it, fine, let him do it. The players all have them. Unfortunately, so do all of the enemies they're going to face. Because really, if these things only cost 4k, everyone who could afford one would get one.

A ring like that just wouldn't be useful for most enemies, since they are expected to die anyway and don't need to worry about healing again after the battle. recurring villains generally don't recur all that often, so they have plenty of time to heal anyway.

Indon
2007-04-23, 09:02 AM
A ring like that just wouldn't be useful for most enemies, since they are expected to die anyway and don't need to worry about healing again after the battle. recurring villains generally don't recur all that often, so they have plenty of time to heal anyway.

That's why you introduce use-activated gloves for touch spells.

In fact, a use-activated glove of some touch spells might not be that bad even if you rightfully shut down things like rings of infinite healage or permanent true strike.

Stephen_E
2007-04-23, 10:31 AM
Use Activated is an item that can be used an unlimited number of tiems per day. You are wrong Stephen.


Emperor Tippy,
I did actually quote the page, albeit I didn't specify I was talking about the DMG.
Pg 213, DMG.
A use activated item is merely an item that activated by been used. A potion IS a use activated item, yet it can only be used once.
Indeed both the text at 213 AND table 7-33, pg 285 (both DMG) make quite clear your definition of a "Use Activated" item is incorrect.

The problem is that the people who put the Guidelines table together were careless.
There are 4 ways of activating an item -
1) Spell Completion
2) Spell Trigger
3) Command Word
4) Use Activation

There are 4 ways of determining numbers of uses of an item
a) One use
b) Charges
c) Uses per day
d) Continous

When making an item you must decide the activation method AND the number of uses.
A Potion is 4a.
A Ring of Jumping is 4d
Boots of Speed are 4c
Note: All of these are Use Activated "4", but all have different ways of determining numbers of uses. Regretably, while the table does indicate this, it does so poorly and in a somewhat confused way, which in the case of "Use-activated or Continous" is completly confusing unless you've read the text on pg 213 DMG.

Stephen

PinkysBrain
2007-04-23, 10:48 AM
Since they are guidelines for the DM which are only part of the item pricing process (includes comparing to existing items etc) this kind of rules lawyering is a bit irrelevant. It's all by DM fiat anyway.

Any good DM is going to be very reluctant to let you use use activation pricing according to the guidelines for activation as a free action linked to other actions. You essentially give away quickening for free compared to a command word operated item (better than quickening in fact). It's okay for spells with a duration, but it gets insane for instantaneous and discharged spells.

Stephen_E
2007-04-23, 11:38 AM
The reason I use the rules lawyering on the Magic Item creation guidelines is that when you do so, the vast majority of "isn't this a great abuse/broken" go away.

Then you can get to deciding whether to allow an item based more on how it fits in your campaign, rather than how broken it is.

It also helps with those non-malicious people who have trouble with a simple "No" from the GM and nag. If you can point out that something isn't legal it makes them concede the point easier (it doesn't help you with those I call "Malicious", i.e. those who've decided they want something and are going to get it no matter what, but I don't think anything, short of dumping them, actually works on those people.

Lets face it, if the table had been better put together the original poster would've been able to just point to it and tell the player that it wasn't legal. Hell, the player may well've not even asked if the table didn't take careful study, along with reference to pages some distance away in the book to understand how the damned thing is supposed to work, along with at least one article on the topic.

Stephen