cheaper magic items

[Raishoiken]

Is there anything to suggest that you couldn't put the class/alignment restriction on staves, wands, etc?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

You can only create or commission an NPC to create published magic items. Those can only vary in caster level (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm#casterLevel) and the built-in methods (such as creating wands, staffs, potions, scrolls, etc. of valid spells). No item has a built-in allowance for restricting it to a particular class, race, skill rank, etc. in order to reduce the price.

Modifications to existing items and custom magic items are the sole responsibility of the DM. The prices for such items are guidelines and the DM always has the final say in what an item's price should be. If a player wants a custom magic item, he can tell the DM what he wants the item to do, and the DM can then look at similar existing items first, and then at the guidelines for custom items, to determine a fair price for the power of the item's effect. Players never get to decide the price of custom or modified items.

[XionUnborn01]

You can only create or commission an NPC to create published magic items. Those can only vary in caster level (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm#casterLevel) and the built-in methods (such as creating wands, staffs, potions, scrolls, etc. of valid spells). No item has a built-in allowance for restricting it to a particular class, race, skill rank, etc. in order to reduce the price.

Modifications to existing items and custom magic items are the sole responsibility of the DM. The prices for such items are guidelines and the DM always has the final say in what an item's price should be. If a player wants a custom magic item, he can tell the DM what he wants the item to do, and the DM can then look at similar existing items first, and then at the guidelines for custom items, to determine a fair price for the power of the item's effect. Players never get to decide the price of custom or modified items.


This, basically. Though I believe that a wand/staff/whatever could have class based restrictions.

[Raishoiken]

You can only create or commission an NPC to create published magic items. Those can only vary in caster level (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm#casterLevel) and the built-in methods (such as creating wands, staffs, potions, scrolls, etc. of valid spells). No item has a built-in allowance for restricting it to a particular class, race, skill rank, etc. in order to reduce the price.

Modifications to existing items and custom magic items are the sole responsibility of the DM. The prices for such items are guidelines and the DM always has the final say in what an item's price should be. If a player wants a custom magic item, he can tell the DM what he wants the item to do, and the DM can then look at similar existing items first, and then at the guidelines for custom items, to determine a fair price for the power of the item's effect. Players never get to decide the price of custom or modified items.

I was thinking less in a game and more would using Those guidelines to price it that way be legal

[Sliver]

I was thinking less in a game and more would using Those guidelines to price it that way be legal

If you are the DM? Sure. Those are guidelines, so you could also price everything as double, or free, and it is still technically legal.

Of course, a wand of Wings of Cover that requires your class to be a Sorcerer is hardly worth 30% discount, for example, but follows those guidelines.

But I'd consider that those restrictions should only allow you to modify the market price, not the cost to craft. You could explain why it should be easier to craft, but you could also explain why it should be harder to craft. The item itself is cheaper to buy/sell, because less people would like it.

[Andezzar]

This, basically. Though I believe that a wand/staff/whatever could have class based restrictions.Any custom item can have such restrictions
Once you have a final cost figure, reduce that number if either of the following conditions applies:
Item Requires Skill to Use

Some items require a specific skill to get them to function. This factor should reduce the cost about 10%.
Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Use

Even more restrictive than requiring a skill, this limitation cuts the cost by 30%.



But I'd consider that those restrictions should only allow you to modify the market price, not the cost to craft. You could explain why it should be easier to craft, but you could also explain why it should be harder to craft. The item itself is cheaper to buy/sell, because less people would like it.This makes no sense at all. The cost to create an item is based on its market price. If only the market price and not the cost is reduced, no one would make such an item. If a crafter can make one item that costs him 500 gp to make which he can sell for 1000 gp, or he could make another one for the same 500 gp that only sells for 700 gp, which one would he make?

[Sliver]

This makes no sense at all. The cost to create an item is based on its market price. If only the market price and not the cost is reduced, no one would make such an item. If a crafter can make one item that costs him 500 gp to make which he can sell for 1000 gp, or he could make another one for the same 500 gp that only sells for 700 gp, which one would he make?

A crafter that wants to sell his magical ware shouldn't craft versions that can only be used by a limited set of potential costumers. My reasoning behind that limit is that I don't think that these mechanics should allow players to buy or even craft items at a cheaper value, but that it gives the DM the option of giving villains some higher powered magical items that only a UMD focused character would have a chance to use, and selling the item won't disturb WBL too much.

If you don't care about sale value, then there is some security in having your magical items harder to be used against you.

Of course, I may be biased, because the last time I had to rule on the subject as a DM was because I had a player that got himself a weapon with use-activated true strike and a use-activated item of Guidance of the Avatar, both with severe limitations, to cut the price down, and an item familiar. Then argued that not allowing it is a houserule, and that it is balanced because he can't hit the other PCs without true strike...

[Andezzar]

A crafter that wants to sell his magical ware shouldn't craft versions that can only be used by a limited set of potential costumers.Then he won't make such items cheaper. That's the economically logical conclusion. He would make them on request for the same price as the item without the restriction and rake in extra profit.


My reasoning behind that limit is that I don't think that these mechanics should allow players to buy or even craft items at a cheaper value, but that it gives the DM the option of giving villains some higher powered magical items that only a UMD focused character would have a chance to use, and selling the item won't disturb WBL too much.That's just needlessly screwing with the PCs. You give the enemies equipment the PCs cannot use and you significantly reduce their wealth. An item the PC uses contributes 100% of its market price to the PC's WBL, an item he sells only 50%, a restricted item the PC can use (at worst) 70%, a sold restricted item 35%. So you either have to make up the difference with other stuff or the PCs will be below WBL.


Of course, I may be biased, because the last time I had to rule on the subject as a DM was because I had a player that got himself a weapon with use-activated true strike and a use-activated item of Guidance of the Avatar, both with severe limitations, to cut the price down, and an item familiar. Then argued that not allowing it is a houserule, and that it is balanced because he can't hit the other PCs without true strike...You got into this problem because you both forgot (or purposely ignored) parts of the rules about creating custom magic items:
You’ll notice, however, that not all the items presented here adhere to these formulas directly. The reasons for this are several. First and foremost, these few formulas aren’t enough to truly gauge the exact differences between, say, a ring of fire resistance and boots of speed—two very dissimilar items. Each of the magic items presented here was examined and modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. The pricing of scrolls assumes that, whenever possible, a wizard or cleric created it. Potions and wands follow the formulas exactly. Staffs follow the formulas closely, and other items require at least some DM judgment calls. Use good sense when assigning prices, using the items in this book as examples.A use activated item of true strike is close in value to an item that gives you +20 to any attack and ignores concealment not to a use activated item of endure elements.

Going from the guideline for enhancement bonuses (2k* bonus² gp) seems reasonable. True strike does not improve damage, but the bonus to attack is not an enhancement bonus, and also ignores concealment, so this balances itself out IMHO. Now you are at a market price of 800k gp, even with a 30% reduction that item is well out of reach for a long time. it is also an epic magic item.

Don't forget every custom magic item is a houserule.

[Curmudgeon]

Custom magic items are always a matter for individual DM adjudication. Would I allow a PC to craft/commission an item that is restricted so that it's less useful if stolen, and at the same time is cheaper for them? Never. Would I allow a PC to stumble upon an existing item for sale, with restrictions that make it a favorable purchase for them, after they've accomplished something significant in the game? Sure. As a DM, I like being creative with treasure and other rewards.

[Sliver]

Then he won't make such items cheaper. That's the economically logical conclusion. He would make them on request for the same price as the item without the restriction and rake in extra profit.

For an NPC crafter? Sure. That may be why PCs might encounter such items as part of loot. But PCs would likely not ask for those restrictions if the price remains the same. For PC crafters? I would simply not allow it. It's basically free and quite large discounts with no investment.

And if the only difference is how much xp or gold an NPC has to pay to craft the item, there is no real benefit to the rule.


That's just needlessly screwing with the PCs. You give the enemies equipment the PCs cannot use and you significantly reduce their wealth. An item the PC uses contributes 100% of its market price to the PC's WBL, an item he sells only 50%, a restricted item the PC can use (at worst) 70%, a sold restricted item 35%. So you either have to make up the difference with other stuff or the PCs will be below WBL.

You missed the point. If the NPC is supposed to have X wealth, and you give him that wealth, but then put those restrictions on his items, then yes, you are screwing the players. I didn't suggest that though, but that's what you are arguing against.

You give the villains items that are stronger than you otherwise would give them, because they are worth less in the market, than the not restricted version. WBL-wise, the players aren't screwed at all. They get the same overall value. It doesn't matter that the item is sold for 35% of the usual price, instead of 50%. Instead of giving the villain a 2000gp item that sells for 1000gp, I'll give him an item that only he can use, but would otherwise be worth 2900gp. Stronger item, but with a 30% discounts worth of restrictions, it is worth 2030gp 'market value', and sold for 1015gp. They players get about the same out of the sale, but I'm able to buff up the NPCs a bit more.

The players aren't screwed by this any more than if the NPC chugs a few potions before the battle.

On the other hand, if you allow players to buy or craft items with those restrictions, you are breaking WBL the other way.


You got into this problem because you both forgot (or purposely ignored) parts of the rules about creating custom magic items:

No, I did not forget that part. It was the player who insisted that not allowing him these items, at these prices, was a houserule, and started acting up when I informed him that the pricing rules were only guidelines.

[Andezzar]

For an NPC crafter? Sure. That may be why PCs might encounter such items as part of loot. But PCs would likely not ask for those restrictions if the price remains the same. For PC crafters? I would simply not allow it. It's basically free and quite large discounts with no investment.There are much more effective ways to break WBL. Remember ladders and 10 ft poles? The former is a discount, the latter an infinite loop.


And if the only difference is how much xp or gold an NPC has to pay to craft the item, there is no real benefit to the rule.NPCs do not have XP and do not expend it on crafting. This is a mechanic solely for PCs IIRC.


You give the villains items that are stronger than you otherwise would give them, because they are worth less in the market, than the not restricted version. WBL-wise, the players aren't screwed at all. They get the same overall value. It doesn't matter that the item is sold for 35% of the usual price, instead of 50%. Instead of giving the villain a 2000gp item that sells for 1000gp, I'll give him an item that only he can use, but would otherwise be worth 2900gp. Stronger item, but with a 30% discounts worth of restrictions, it is worth 2030gp 'market value', and sold for 1015gp. They players get about the same out of the sale, but I'm able to buff up the NPCs a bit more.And that is a different way of shifting the balance. Either the PCs get less WBL than they can expect or the NPCs are more powerful than they can expect. AFAIK the books do not mention which type of items is the standard, but I can't remember a creature entry yet with restricted items.


The players aren't screwed by this any more than if the NPC chugs a few potions before the battle.It's more like chugging a potion they are not supposed to have.


No, I did not forget that part. It was the player who insisted that not allowing him these items, at these prices, was a houserule, and started acting up when I informed him that the pricing rules were only guidelines.We are talking about a potential problem player, not a rules problem then.

[Sliver]

There are much more effective ways to break WBL. Remember ladders and 10 ft poles? The former is a discount, the latter an infinite loop.

The game having other abuses is not a reason to allow this one.


At the hands of PCs, there is no use for this but in an abusive nature, investing less to get the same effect. What do you suggest to do with this, besides equipping NPCs with items that are otherwise out of their budget?

[Andezzar]

The game having other abuses is not a reason to allow this one.


At the hands of PCs, there is no use for this but in an abusive nature, investing less to get the same effect. What do you suggest to do with this, besides equipping NPCs with items that are otherwise out of their budget?I don't see it as an abuse, just one way of using their available resources. Unless you have a very homogeneous party, making and using restricted items will prevent other party members from using them if necessary. Depending on the item in question that can be debilitating. If the party only uses those restrictions on a few items that they don't want others to use anyways the impact on WBL is pretty minor.

What do you think about the Ancestral Relic feat/Ancestral Daisho class feature? They double the resources a character gets out of magic items, regardless of whether he can use them or not.

[ericgrau]

If anything as a DM I would make such an item cost more to craft and cost more to get from a merchant because they are an advantage, but if the PC tried to sell it I'd make them sell for less than market value because they are much harder for the merchant to resell.

But basically, no, there is no way to make the market value of a a magic item less than what's fair because it's the DM's job to make sure the magic item's market price is fair value. Except for tricking the DM, but that's not nice. There are feats to reduce the cost of crafting to a lower percentage of the market price though.

[marphod]

Custom magic items are always a matter for individual DM adjudication. Would I allow a PC to craft/commission an item that is restricted so that it's less useful if stolen, and at the same time is cheaper for them? Never.

This.

(See Champions/HERO on when a disadvantage is not a disadvantage.)

On the other hand, if a PC came up with a restriction that actually limited the usefulness of an item in a practical way (an item for a Spellthief that requires them to have stolen a spell that none of the PCs can cast and that is likely to remain true; a wizard in Ravenloft making an item that they can't use, but their Dread Companion Familiar could; an intelligent item that has goals that are counter to the party's and has a high Ego value; an item that only affects a creature type that doesn't exist in the party, but is often part of NPC allies) I would consider it.

[Andezzar]

Even if the crafter (or one PC in the party the item is made for) can use the restricted item it is still generally less useful because most likely the other PCs cannot use it and there will be fewer buyers. So a price reduction is justified IMHO.

[Raishoiken]

So assuming the reductions are applicable, would the pricing of a staff of sanctum gate (created outside of sanctum) that is class restricted with 2 charges left go as follows?: ((8*15*375+5000)*.7)*.04?

[marphod]

Even if the crafter (or one PC in the party the item is made for) can use the restricted item it is still generally less useful because most likely the other PCs cannot use it and there will be fewer buyers. So a price reduction is justified IMHO.

Most likely the other PCs cannot use it.

Unless/until the original owner upgrades to something better, how often do you see custom items shared among PCs?

"These Bracers of Archery are gender and type/subtype restricted to the ranged martial character" is not a restriction. The only PC who was going to use them was going to be the ranged martial character, so the restriction is irrelevant. If they sell it later, sure, they may get less for it. They also didn't run the same risk of an NPC stealing it and using it against them in an ambush.

A restriction is only a restriction if it actually does something. Making someone take a second UMD check to activate an item is not a significant cost. So a Healing Belt that can only heal female characters in a male-dominated party might be worth something. A healing belt that can only be activated by its owner isn't.


If the item was made just to be sold, sure they can have the discount. They're converting a small amount of XP into gold, which isn't very efficient to start with.

[atemu1234]

Most likely the other PCs cannot use it.

Unless/until the original owner upgrades to something better, how often do you see custom items shared among PCs?

"These Bracers of Archery are gender and type/subtype restricted to the ranged martial character" is not a restriction. The only PC who was going to use them was going to be the ranged martial character, so the restriction is irrelevant. If they sell it later, sure, they may get less for it. They also didn't run the same risk of an NPC stealing it and using it against them in an ambush.

A restriction is only a restriction if it actually does something. Making someone take a second UMD check to activate an item is not a significant cost. So a Healing Belt that can only heal female characters in a male-dominated party might be worth something. A healing belt that can only be activated by its owner isn't.


If the item was made just to be sold, sure they can have the discount. They're converting a small amount of XP into gold, which isn't very efficient to start with.

I agree. These rules are supposed to be guidelines and no one sensible takes them as gospel.

[Andezzar]

"These Bracers of Archery are gender and type/subtype restricted to the ranged martial character" is not a restriction. Gender and type/subtype are not valid restrictions according to the guidelines. The valid ones are required skill and required class or alignment.


The only PC who was going to use them was going to be the ranged martial character, so the restriction is irrelevant. If they sell it later, sure, they may get less for it. They also didn't run the same risk of an NPC stealing it and using it against them in an ambush.

A restriction is only a restriction if it actually does something. Making someone take a second UMD check to activate an item is not a significant cost. So a Healing Belt that can only heal female characters in a male-dominated party might be worth something. A healing belt that can only be activated by its owner isn't.The bracers of archery are probably not going to be used by other characters. The healing belt is much more likely. If that item can only be used by lawful neutral clerics is an actual restriction if the lawful neural cleric needs healing and cannot act. The same goes for a custom item that allows you to cast water breathing, teleport, featherfall etc.
Items with reduced/restricted effect (such as the healing belt that can only heal certain creatures) is something completely different and not covered by the guidelines.

The UMD check is a significant cost, if the character who wants to use it does not have UMD or a bionus that is too low to auto succeed.


If the item was made just to be sold, sure they can have the discount. They're converting a small amount of XP into gold, which isn't very efficient to start with.If you craft items to be sold, you do not want a discount as described in the DMG.