Taking Away an Item

[Kesnit]

When my wife was running a 3.5 game, she equipped an NPC with a magical item that allows dimension door as a swift action 3/day (we think). Of course, one of the PCs managed to get this item. (We'll call the player B.) When he wrote down what the item did, however, his notes to himself were not very clear. In the months since, I've taken over running the game and my wife is now a player.

B has taken to using the item all the time. And since no one remembers how the item was intended to work, I have no solid basis for telling him that it doesn't really work at-will, which is how he's using it. (Swift dim door, then full attack.) When I've confronted him about how often he uses the item, he says some of those dim doors were from his spells/day. (He's a Rogue/SORC/Daggerspell mage.) Of course, using dim door that way is a standard action, but since he doesn't always use it in combat, I don't always know if he really is using the item or his spells/day.

Out of frustration (since B is abusing the item), I want to take it away from him. I have two ideas on how to do it.

1) Just flat-out tell him his PC no longer has that item. This would be the easiest, but I know B will object furiously to losing his "toy."
2) Send high-level NPCs to steal it from him. I'd make a point of using non-lethal means, probably Mass Hold Person to keep the party from acting. However, even one PC making their save could negate that. (The methods would be non-lethal regardless.) This option would make sense in-game since the item was originally stolen from a dead NPC. Nothing is stopping that NPCs allies from finding the party and taking the item back.

There is no issue of losing the item taking the PC below WBL. Due to having a friendly NPC Artificer, the PC in question has 2 +7-equivilant daggers, along with his other stuff.

So my questions

1) How would you feel about a DM taking away an item that you have had and been using for quite some time, even though that DM is not the DM that gave you the item?
2) Would it be better to do it with an in-game option (where the party has some chance to fight back) or an out-of-game "this is the way it is" scenario?

[Keltest]

Have it break from battle damage. If he's getting hit in combat at all there is a chance it will get smacked as well, right? Have the player roll percentile every time he takes damage in a combat that he used it, and if he passes a threshold (be fair on this part), the trinket gets damaged and breaks.

[MyrPsychologist]

1. I'd be pretty pissed because it means that instead of TALKING to me and making sure I was using my character properly the DM just deems me unable to adapt and takes away something from me. Seriously. Just tell the player the real parameters of the item and state that it will now be enforced because the rules are important.

2. IF I felt so inclined to do this I would make it an encounter. Maybe have the party encounter some appropriate CRed thieves who have already sold it when/if they are found but have some other rewards to compensate for the loss. Or maybe a sunder based opponent if the item is big enough to properly sunder. So to answer your question: in game. Because otherwise it feels even more insulting.

[Bronk]

Good news for you!

It doesn't matter if the spell is going off with a swift or a standard action, because, as the spell states, "After using this spell, you can’t take any other actions until your next turn."

Just enforce that, and you're all set.

[BowStreetRunner]

I have no solid basis for telling him that it doesn't really work at-will, which is how he's using it. (Swift dim door, then full attack.)

The spell explicitly states "After using this spell, you can’t take any other actions until your next turn." How is he getting around this?

EDIT: ninja'd by Bronk

[phlidwsn]

Sit him down and talk to him about it: "I know you're having a blast with this item, but its unbalancing combat. So from now on it only works 3/day."

Also, what's the item called? Someone might recognize the source and be able to back you up with the original text.

[Geddy2112]

As others stated, enforcing the rules of d. door will solve the problem. But what if it was totally legal how the player was using the item? I would never take an item away in game unless it was breaking the game. I would talk to the player first, ask if they would give it up or perhaps use it less/never. After that, use legitimate but beatable means to take it. If its ruining the fun of the table, mages disjunction is a thing, but that should only be a last resort...

[Firest Kathon]

Two things:

After using Dimension Door (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dimensionDoor.htm), as a spell or from an object, you cannot take any more actions until your next turn.
At-will does not mean you can use it as a swift or free action, instead it signifies you can use it an unlimited times per day.

I support the suggestions that you explain to him the issues the item is causing, and come to an agreement with him on the rules you will use from now on (e.g. 3/day as a standard action).

Edited to add: Swordsaged, I should really refresh before answering...

[Kesnit]

It doesn't matter if the spell is going off with a swift or a standard action, because, as the spell states, "After using this spell, you can’t take any other actions until your next turn."

Just enforce that, and you're all set.


The spell explicitly states "After using this spell, you can’t take any other actions until your next turn." How is he getting around this?

EDIT: ninja'd by Bronk

I completely missed that in reading dim door. Knowing that helps.


Sit him down and talk to him about it: "I know you're having a blast with this item, but its unbalancing combat. So from now on it only works 3/day."

The thing is, as I said, I can't track how often he uses it since he has dim door on his spells known list.


Also, what's the item called? Someone might recognize the source and be able to back you up with the original text.

Homebrew item


I would talk to the player first, ask if they would give it up or perhaps use it less/never.

I have spoken to him about it. He did not really see the issue with having the item.


At-will does not mean you can use it as a swift or free action, instead it signifies you can use it an unlimited times per day.

I know. Sorry if I wasn't clear. The item gives dim door as a swift action, and until B found his poorly written notes on it, we thought the item was useable at-will.

[Ger. Bessa]

You can not take any action after a Ddoor. If it's "as Ddoor", then he can't full attack after.

In the same vein as breaking the item, you could depower-it back to 3/day, or say that it only has n charges left. That way he can still use it, for a long time even if he doesn't abuse it.

If you need to argue why, bring out the value of an item granting 8th level (quickened Ddoor) at will, and compare to WBL.

Edit : ninjas are everywhere ...

[Khedrac]

One other thing (not knowing your party level) is to look up Anklets of Translocation and discuss with the player making it have those abilities instead.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

The thing is, as I said, I can't track how often he uses it since he has dim door on his spells known list.

...ask him? As the DM, you're more than allowed to make sure players are tracking their abilities properly. When he uses it, ask if it's from his spells-per-day, or from the item.


I have spoken to him about it. He did not really see the issue with having the item.

Have you explained to him that the system isn't balanced around having at-will blinks followed by full attacks?


I know. Sorry if I wasn't clear. The item gives dim door as a swift action, and until B found his poorly written notes on it, we thought the item was useable at-will.

Have you asked your wife? It seems she designed the item. Either way, as the DM, it's really ultimately your call: if the item is proving abusive then explain that to him and power it down somewhat.

If he's set on the full-attack shenanigans, maybe allow a Swift Action blink (with actions allowed after that) either 3/day or 1/encounter. Should cut the power curve while still allowing him to have fun.

[Segev]

1) As others have said, enforce the "no actions after using dimension door" rule. If he tries to argue it, tell him you have to enforce it because as it's been being used, it's causing you difficulty running the game.

2) As DM, you have both the right and responsibility to know what spells your players' characters have prepared/what slots they have available. Ask to see his list of prepared spells, or his accounting of how many spell slots he has, at the start of each game-day. When he uses a dimension door, ask him if he's taking it from his spells for the day or from his item's uses for the day. Keep track.

3) It is possible to set up encounters to stymie this power. Illusions can cause him to dimension door to the wrong places (monsters that aren't there, for instance). Dimension lock can make a room unable to be moved into, out of, or about within by teleportation effects (which dimension door is). Dimensional anchor can be cast on a troublesome teleporting opponent to deny them the ability to use teleportation effects at all, themselves.

4) Have you, in discussing this with him, spoken with him about why you view it as a problem? Have you asked him for help or advice on what he would do in your place? Engaging the player on that level can sometimes be fruitful.

[Firest Kathon]

The thing is, as I said, I can't track how often he uses it since he has dim door on his spells known list.
If you cannot trust him with that, you may have a bigger problem at hand...

[(Un)Inspired]

Send in a honeypot to distract him. While your agent is whispering into his ear and rubbing his thigh, you slip over and erase the item from his notes as he stammers at the honeypot's advances nervously.

When he tries to use the item in combat act as though you've never heard of him having it before. Ask him to show you where it's written down in his notes.

Disavow any knowledge that the item ever existed in the first place. Look at your player like he's crazy any time he tries to bring it up.

Dispose of the honeypot.

Discretely.

[Vrakk]

As others have suggested I think the best approach is to talk with the player about the item, the problems/abuse you feel it has, and ask him if he is ok with giving it up or accepting changes to the item that you impose.

You can sweeten the deal by offering him something else. Perhaps something similar to a spelltouched feat. There isn't one for dim door but you could come up with an option. In return for giving up the item maybe once a day he can use a dim door spell as a swift action - still great for when its needed but it cuts way back on the number of times it happens. He also would have the advantage of having it as a SPA instead of an item.

[Temennigru]

Dimension door makes your turn end when you use it. That is an important thing to remember and people always seem to forget, so you can't teleport and attack.
It also provokes attacks of opportunity, so if you attack and use it to escape, you get attacked.
By all means I don't think dimension door 3/day is unbalanced.

If you still feel like the item is too strong, make someone with a rust monster wand attack them. The wand will eat the item and effectively destroy it.

If the player is really doing this out of bad faith, wait to tell him that he can take no other actions AFTER he teleports =P
Remember that in a DM x Player fight, the DM always wins.

[marphod]

Are you using 3.5 or pathfinder?

Items akin to boots that grant teleportation in 3.5 include:

Anklets of Translocation (swift, 2x day, 10) 1400gp
Dimension Stride Boots (standard, bonus to jump, 5 charges a day, each charge can be used to teleport 20', 3 for 40', all 5 for 60')
Boots of Swift Passage (move, teleport 20', 5/day) 5k gp
Boots of Big Stepping (standard, 60', 1/day) 6kgp
Boots of Teleportation (standard, 3/day) 49k gp

The only one of these that allows for a full attack after using are the Anklets, and they are severely restricted on range.

How much are the boots supposed to be worth?

If it is a swift action that often, at 60' range, you're looking into minor artifact levels of power. Which means give it an intelligence and start using it against the PC, or start having a church look for their holy relic. Plenty of opportunity for fun there. =)

[Jay R]

Magic items aren't indestructible or eternal. It just stops working. He doesn't know why.

Or a tiny crack appears and a genie pops out, saying, "I'm free!" He disappears, and the item never works again.

Until then, every time he uses a Dimension Door, ask him whether it's a spell or the item. After three times in a day, it doesn't work.

Or perhaps the first time he tries to use it for a fourth time in one day, it breaks, and never works again.

Or give him something in return. He suddenly realizes that the item has a Wish - but he doesn't realize that after using the wish, the item will never work again.

[MesiDoomstalker]

As others have mentioned, remind him of the specifics of the D-Door spell. Second, enforce he divulges where each individual casting of D-Door is coming from; his own spellslots or the item. Keep your own notes on the matter and enforce it. Eventually, depending on how adamant the player is on abusing the item, he'll start tracking honestly. If the item still causing issues, bring it up with him. Its important everyone is having fun an the game, and part of that fun is a balanced game (where that balance point lies depends on the group and DM). I'd personally err on the side of not taking the item away if more reasonable compromises can be made (such as actually following the rules).

[Troacctid]

Explain that after actually reading the spell, it doesn't do what everyone thought it could do, and you cannot actually take any actions after teleporting. (Because this is totally true.) Explain that with this new knowledge, you will be running the spell correctly in the future.

Also, if an area is supposed to be difficult to access even for high-level characters, make sure it's dimensionally locked. (Anti-scrying measures should be standard as well, and a simple Alarm spell goes a long way too.) I like to have my high-security locations use special clearance bracelets that allow the wearer to bypass the wards, so only someone with a bracelet can teleport in or out. You shouldn't be dropping anti-teleportation wards in every dungeon just to counter your teleporting PC, but if your NPCs are making a conscious effort to prevent infiltration or escape, they'd be fools if they just forgot about the existence of teleportation magic.

Of course, if the place has a lower budget and is mostly concerned with keeping random commoners and kobolds off the premises, dimensional locks are probably overkill.

[JoranShadeslayr]

If all else fails, The Gleaners could always send a team of 40th level agents to retrieve the item. They love collecting powerful magic items.

[mabriss lethe]

Turn it into a plot point. Give him a chance to be the Hero-of-the-Hour (tm):

-This scenario assumes the presence of 4+ players. Player B, a full fledged caster, some sort of meatshield, and one Other.

-Set up a situation where the party get's trapped in a nigh inescapable room. Strange sigils and arcane patterns plaster the walls, floor, and ceiling of the room in a faintly glowing spiderweb, keeping all of the exits barred while the BBEG puts some grand (time-sensitive) scheme into play. Nothing at all can escape while the sigils bar the way.

-Allow the party caster to make a spellcraft or Knowledge arcana check. The caster figures out that the party can MacGyver up an impromptu ritual to short circuit the prison, though it's going to require some sacrifices. First, they're going to need to temporarily disrupt key sections of the design. Second, you're going to need a power source. Third, you're going to need a modestly powerful nexus of dimensional energy.

-To temporarily disrupt the trap, Someone is first going to have to blot out a handful of key sigils. That's the Caster's Job. It's delicate work, though. require some more skill checks. If done incorrectly, all hell breaks loose. Strange lights streak and crackle through the design and twisted apparitions come crawling out of the walls to attack the party, it's up to the Meatshield to keep everyone safe and keep the apparitions distracted while the rest of the party is doing their thing.

-Once the sigils are disrupted, the party has a very short window to make their escape before the trap restores itself. The ritual will need a large reservoir of power to be directed to that nexus of dimensional energy. I recommend some sort of blood sacrifice. The Other (whatever the class) takes on the role. He'll need to bleed himself nearly dry (to the point of unconciousness/death) He opens up a vein and starts to pump his blood onto a hastily erected altar made from materials scavenged from the sections of the stonework that the caster damaged. Once he bleeds himself to 0 or fewer HP, the altar/battery is fully charged and releases its stored blood power into the dimensional nexus. It'll be up to the meatshield to defend this guy from the apparitions while he comes withing spitting distance of death.

-If you haven't figured it out, the dimensional nexus I keep referencing is this suspect magic item in Player B's possession. Once the power starts flowing from the altar to the magic item, things get real. More apparitions appear, and it will take everyone to protect player B while he finishes the ritual. assign the trap a number of "hit points." and a moderate skill DC. Player B will start making rolls to shape the power pouring into the item. It can be any appropriate magic related skill, depending on what his character has, Knowledge Arcana, Spellcraft, UMD, Perform (chant) even. When he beats the DC, subtract his result from the trap's "HP" When he fails, he takes a token amount of damage. All the while, the item is glowing brighter and getting hotter to the touch. When he finally brings the trap to 0 hp, the party hears a soul wrenching wail as both the apparitions and the sigils start to dissolve and swirl through the air, to be drawn into Player B's item. With a final flash a portal opens, allowing the party to escape.

It's up to you what to do with the item after that, but here are some suggestions:
-It overloads and explodes, destroying the item. The remaining fragments could be gathered up and reforged into a more reasonable item, say an anklet of translocation.
-The item now bears a curse: He may continue to use it as he has been (abuse and all) but now he runs the risk of triggering the curse instead of its normal effect. If, say, he fails a will save when using it, It could, instead of using D. Door, create a short lived Maze effect, or possibly Hold Person or Sepia Snake Sigil. Something related to the prison it now embodies.
-The ritual burns up most of the item's power and it no longer functions quite like it used to. Make whatever corrections to the item you see fit at this time.

[icefractal]

Have you explained to him that the system isn't balanced around having at-will blinks followed by full attacks?Well ... sort of. I'm curious what level and class the character in question is. Because in some cases, that would be a perfectly reasonable thing to have.

Assuming it is necessary to remove it, you should do it OOC. At this point, you're not a neutral party, so whatever you do to remove it is going to be DM fiat. Having NPCs go after for a reason doesn't change that at all - you're still the one making the NPCs and deciding their actions. So any attempt to remove it IC and claim its just a normal in-game event is going to insult and annoy at least the player in question, maybe the other players too. You have the authority to remove or change the item, just acknowledge that's what you're doing.

[Temennigru]

Well ... sort of. I'm curious what level and class the character in question is. Because in some cases, that would be a perfectly reasonable thing to have.


Based on his classes, I would say at least lvl 10 (Rogue/SORC/Daggerspell mage)

[Oryan77]

I have spoken to him about it. He did not really see the issue with having the item.

How much is an At Will, Swift Action, Dimensional Door (body slotless?) item cost? Figure out the value, compare it to the maximum value item he should have at his level, and just show him the numbers. If the item is 100,000 gp, and his entire wealth for his level is 10,000 gp, then that should be a perfectly reasonable reason for explaining why it needs to be removed.

Of course he will say he doesn't see an issue with it if you don't have information showing why he's wrong. He knows how much of an advantage he has using it and doesn't want to give it up.

If he doesn't want to be reasonable, then just use one of the suggestions here for taking it away in-game. If he complains, tell him, "If you don't see an issue having the item, then there shouldn't be any issues with you not having the item."

[Grod_The_Giant]

Assuming it is necessary to remove it, you should do it OOC. At this point, you're not a neutral party, so whatever you do to remove it is going to be DM fiat. Having NPCs go after for a reason doesn't change that at all - you're still the one making the NPCs and deciding their actions. So any attempt to remove it IC and claim its just a normal in-game event is going to insult and annoy at least the player in question, maybe the other players too. You have the authority to remove or change the item, just acknowledge that's what you're doing.
This. This is reeeaaaal important to remember.

[Kesnit]

One other thing (not knowing your party level) is to look up Anklets of Translocation and discuss with the player making it have those abilities instead.

They just leveled to 12.


Have you asked your wife? It seems she designed the item.

Actually, I made it. But as I said, it was intended for an NPC, so we didn't really stat it out because it was intended to go away when the NPC did. (For all practical purposes it was a 1-use item, since it was intended for the NPC to escape if necessary.) When B killed the NPC and took the amulet, she had to make something up off the cuff.


If he's set on the full-attack shenanigans, maybe allow a Swift Action blink (with actions allowed after that) either 3/day or 1/encounter. Should cut the power curve while still allowing him to have fun.

Either one of those would work. As it is now, he's jumping around the battlefield to wherever he can get Sneak Attack.


Are you using 3.5 or pathfinder?

3.5



If it is a swift action that often, at 60' range, you're looking into minor artifact levels of power. Which means give it an intelligence and start using it against the PC, or start having a church look for their holy relic. Plenty of opportunity for fun there. =)

LOL. I like that idea, but it was actually made for a vampire rogue by the vampire lord. (Or rather, one of his minions.)


Well ... sort of. I'm curious what level and class the character in question is. Because in some cases, that would be a perfectly reasonable thing to have.

Rogue 2/SORC 5/Daggerspell Mage 5.


How much is an At Will, Swift Action, Dimensional Door (body slotless?) item cost?

It's an amulet, actually. It's worth 56,000, which is in excess of WBL for when he got it (LVL 10). But that's a hard argument to make because the party (especially B) is far over WBL thanks to an NPC artificer. (The artificer was my character.) B currently has - in addition to the amulet - 2 +5-equivalent daggers.

On the other hand, that does make a good argument. His daggers alone are worth 100,000, so taking away a 56,000 item (or turning it into a 33600 gold item, at 3/day) isn't going to hurt him.

[marphod]

LOL. I like that idea, but it was actually made for a vampire rogue by the vampire lord. (Or rather, one of his minions.)


Anyone can be divinely inspired. Or the minion was Vecna, in disguise. Or that's what the minion told the lord, but really, she just found it on her workbench one day. or...

You always have options.

[darksolitaire]

LOL. I like that idea, but it was actually made for a vampire rogue by the vampire lord. (Or rather, one of his minions.)

It sounds perfectly normal for a vampire lord to want that kind of item back...:smallamused:

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

It's an amulet, actually. It's worth 56,000, which is in excess of WBL for when he got it (LVL 10). But that's a hard argument to make because the party (especially B) is far over WBL thanks to an NPC artificer. (The artificer was my character.) B currently has - in addition to the amulet - 2 +5-equivalent daggers.

Quickened Dimension Door is an 8th level spell, requiring a 15th level caster. It's Use Activated, so we want the formula [Caster Level * Spell Level * 2,000], giving us a total price of 240,000, putting it firmly in Epic Magic Item territory as per the rules for Epic Magic Items. You could even argue that teleportation isn't the body slot affinity for an amulet (which are typically protection or discernment oriented), which would put a x1.5 multiplier on that price.

That said, I still think my suggestion of "If he's set on the full-attack shenanigans, maybe allow a Swift Action blink (with actions allowed after that) either 3/day or 1/encounter" is going to be among your best bets for toning down the power level significantly while keeping the player as satisfied as possible.

[Kesnit]

Quickened Dimension Door is an 8th level spell, requiring a 15th level caster.

Oops... Yeah... Forgot to take Quickened into account. :smallredface:

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

Oops... Yeah... Forgot to take Quickened into account. :smallredface:

Which can be your defense alone: he's level 10, with an Epic Magic Item. Further, it's an epic magic item that you're making MORE powerful by allowing him to take actions afterwards. :smalltongue:

If that doesn't justify heavily nerfing or removing the item then I'm not sure what does. :smallbiggrin:

[icefractal]

Which can be your defense alone: he's level 10, with an Epic Magic Item. Further, it's an epic magic item that you're making MORE powerful by allowing him to take actions afterwards. Eh ... I wouldn't call it anywhere close to Epic. Strong for level 12, yes. If it was 3/day, it'd be pretty normal for mid-level.

The default price guidelines are inaccurate in both directions - something like Constant True Strike is way stronger than the price would suggest, but there are also many combinations much weaker than the formula gives. That's why the MIC pretty much tossed the formula in the garbage and went with an empirical approach.

One way to emulate this, by the book, would be:
1) Dimension Jumper, constant. Lets you teleport as a move action, and can act afterward.
2) Hustle, at will. Converts a swift action to a move action.
Expensive but not epic. And I'm sure there are more efficient ways.

[Darth Ultron]

I think the problem might be: are you using the rules or not. Ok, so the player has a custom magic item made by a DM, so who gets to decide what the item does: the DM or the player? It would be the DM right? Kinda makes no sense for a player to have a character pick up a sword and say ''oh this is a a sword +20''.

As a DM do you not look over and approve character sheets? You should.

Why not have the burden of proof on the player?

[Crake]

If it was supposed to be, for all intents and purposes, a single use item to escape a sticky situation, why did it suddenly become a 3/day item and not a single use item?

[Kesnit]

I think the problem might be: are you using the rules or not. Ok, so the player has a custom magic item made by a DM, so who gets to decide what the item does: the DM or the player? It would be the DM right? Kinda makes no sense for a player to have a character pick up a sword and say ''oh this is a a sword +20''.

The problem is that when he first got the item, my wife hadn't statted it, so had to make up something off the top of her head. Then we all forgot what that was. At some point, he just started using it more and more, and no one really thought about it until I realized he was using it all the time.


If it was supposed to be, for all intents and purposes, a single use item to escape a sticky situation, why did it suddenly become a 3/day item and not a single use item?

In hindsight, it should have been. But my wife didn't think of that at the time. She also didn't think about how useful it would be, or how he would use it. (The group is new, and we had just started playing together a few weeks before.)

[atemu1234]

Talk to the player?
Is there a sarcastic variant for Swordsaging?

[AzraelX]

Well, not much to add: multiple people have pointed out why it shouldn't be causing the problems it's causing, as per the spell's rules, and another person has offered an alternative item description that is possibly even more in-line with what the player seems to want anyways.

Considering this information invalidates the reasoning you originally had for wanting to remove the item so badly, it's surprising that you're still talking about how you can try to justify removing the item based on WBL.

Do you really dislike this individual and want to "put him in his place", or is this a course of action you're only exploring hypothetically now?

[Temennigru]

In hindsight, it should have been. But my wife didn't think of that at the time. She also didn't think about how useful it would be, or how he would use it. (The group is new, and we had just started playing together a few weeks before.)

You should've made it an artifact. Those can't be identified and can give you more time to tell the player what it does.