Stacking Healing Belts?

[Turk Mannion]

A player in my campaign has a healing belt. He wants to "add" the healing belt property on top of the existing one. In essence, he wants the healing of two belts on one item.

The DM is debating whether this can be done. He is leaning toward accepting it, but says the player must keep the three charges of each belt separate. Thoughts?

[Khedrac]

That the player must track the charges separately is a given.

That said, I don't think I would allow this, despite not being that powerful.
Why not?
Well whilst the player can happily swap in and out different belts, it is the belt that is being enhanced. So the belt will have the healing enchantment twice - well, same source bonus rules and all that strongly implies that they should overlap - at best if you allow it you will have to trigger them simultaneously - roll twice and take the better result (not get both).
Also the precedent is in the weapon enchantments - a sword can be +1 flaming, shocking but it cannot be +1 flaming, flaming.

Short answer - I don't think you can put the same enchantment twice on an item (double weapons and similar here count as multiple items).

[Yogibear41]

No, if he wants more healing, tell him to buy a 2nd belt.

[Azoth]

I really don't see any issue with letting him upgrade it. Just have him pay the cost for a second one and tell him he can't blow more than 3 charges at a time. All it saves is the hassle of him swapping out belts when one is uses up.

It is always how my group has handled these things and it hasn't caused any issues. Sure occasionally it means someone can spam a x/per day item a time or two more during a single encounter, but most items that are x/day and cheap enough you want to buy multiple of aren't that powerful (except obvious ones like the 12k Belt of Battle).

[Propagandalf]

You mean he just wants to wear two Healing Belts at once? Or that he wants to create/buy (via Craft Wondrous item etc.) a belt that has extra charges?

On the first one: No, since the one-slot-one-item rule.
On the second: Yes, but I'd wager it'd cost a little more than just two healing belts (crafting rules said the second property is 1,5x the price I think?).

Summa summarum: Agreeing with Azoth. I'd allow it. Just make it cost a bit more for the added convenience.

[TheifofZ]

Well, two thoughts spring to mind when I see this.
First: instead of having some wonky mechanic using two belts in one or swippy swapping them or whatever, why not instead have an 'Improved Healing Belt' item that has increased healing at all charge-expenditure levels. It shouldn't take more than 5 minutes of GM tinkering to have something viable and balanced that solves the issue nicely.

Second: The only reason I can think of that would push someone to be discussing this in the first place would be if the party is strapped for healing. Honestly, if the party is that hard up for reliable health restoration, then there are a few better choices out there than stacking multiple belts. But that's more irrelephant than it is important at the moment.

[Starbuck_II]

Also the precedent is in the weapon enchantments - a sword can be +1 flaming, shocking but it cannot be +1 flaming, flaming.

Short answer - I don't think you can put the same enchantment twice on an item (double weapons and similar here count as multiple items).

Actually, the precedent is in his favor since you can have double flaming. In fact, WotC had a BBEG had with a double flaming weapon that also had cold damage (+1d6 fire, +1d6 fire, and +1d6 cold).

[Khedrac]

Actually, the precedent is in his favor since you can have double flaming. In fact, WotC had a BBEG had with a double flaming weapon that also had cold damage (+1d6 fire, +1d6 fire, and +1d6 cold).
Interesting - WotC examples are not a guide to what is permitted as they are notoriously poor. That said, I accept that I could be wrong on the double flaming, and if that is allowed then double healing definitely is.

[Rubik]

The MIC gives explicit rules regarding adding additional item properties to an item, with no exceptions made for multiple identical properties. 50% markup for all but the most expensive one. If he wants multiple healing belt properties on one belt, there's nothing stopping him except WBL.

[jiriku]

I'd allow it. One of the annoying little problems with D&D 3.5 is the "Christmas tree effect" where characters must deck themselves out in a dozen or more magic items (even duplicates of the same item like we see here) to get the job done. The player's proposed solution creates one powerful and interesting item rather than multiple weak, bland, interchangeable items. This is a Good Thing for having a fun, stylish game. It should be rewarded. In fact, I'd suggest waiving the 50% stacking penalty to avoid punishing the player for having a good idea, and pooling the charges simply because its simpler and more elegant to do so.

I can understand that the DM is concerned about power creep with player-created items, but really, we're talking about combining two 750-gp items here. That is less than the value of a +1 dagger.

[Sagetim]

1) are you sure it was double flaming and not a double weapon with flaming on both ends, or flaming and another enchantment that was like flaming to give the extra d6 of fire damage?

2) this shouldn't be a real problem. It's going to cost cash, time, and possibly xp to keep stacking healing belt charges onto that one belt. And even with infinite charges it would still have a problem of being useful in combat because it eats into your action economy to utilize.

3) I would probably just let him increase the number of charges on it instead of having to pay extra and keep track separately. It's less of a hassle and even with more charges per day, it's still got a maximum healing range of 6 to 48 with no way to bring the floor up. At higher level, healing even the maximum this belt offers as a standard action is going to pale in comparison to the damage you could (and probably should) be facing on each hit.

So, let's say that someone paid out for this belt to have 30 charges instead of 3. At lower level, this will help the players patch up mid combat and between fights, potentially helping them survive when they would otherwise not. At mid level, the in combat healing starts really eating into the charges and the action economy if the person wants to keep using the belt to do healing. At high level, the belt is going to be most useful for out of combat patch up jobs, and even then it's probably going to run out of charges before an adventuring day is through if you're using it to fix the whole party. And there are many things at high level that kill you without worrying about hp damage...so...yeah, the belt drops off in usefulness.

Edit: While I would be wary about letting the players stack enchantments on weapons, if they really really wanted to make a +1 flaming, flaming, flaming, flaming, flaming, flaming, flaming, flaming, flaming longsword, they could. Then they would cry whenever they faced someone with 5 or 10 or more fire resist, because each of those flaming dice are an individual d6, not pooled with the rest. Generally speaking, in dnd having elemental versatility is more beneficial than having a lot of one element.

[elonin]

I'd allow stacking of the same item at 1.5 price. I'm against allowing multiple items for the same slot allowing additional daily charges.

[Abithrios]

I don't see anything wrong with buying more than one belt. I don't remember anything in the belt's description that would prevent you from swapping them out.

Further, I don't see any problem allowing one belt to be upgraded with more charges. If you want, you could set a limit of three charges per activation. Even if you don't set such a limit, blowing all six charges to heal 7d8 points of damage makes the efficiency oriented side of me wince, while the balance oriented side of me says "meh". I would definitely not give it a 50% markup. As a player, I would treat such a markup exactly as I would an outright ban, buying a wand of cure light wounds or lesser vigor instead--those I can definitely use more than one of in the same day.

Regardless, healing belts suffer from the same problem that most healing sources do in 3.5. They are too slow and keep you from attacking. Conventional wisdom in these parts states that if you use your actions to end a fight, you will probably prevent more damage than you could heal in the same number and type of action.

Rules as written, I think you can put one healing belt on. Then you can put another on over it, which deactivates the first. You can repeat the process as many times as you wish (which is probably not very many). You then use the charges on the last one you put on and remove it, reactivating the previous belt. I am not sure what action it is to remove a belt, but it is really fast as long as you are not using it to keep your pants up (i.e. don't thread it through your belt loops). You just undo the buckle and it falls to the ground. It took me no more than about two seconds trying it just now.

[Turk Mannion]

OP here,

Thanks for all the assistance. I am going to print out the discussion for my DM and let him make the call.

I admit I instinctively would have said no, based on stacking enchantment rules. However, I have been swayed to agreeing with most, that stacking should be permitted. I like the idea of simply increasing the charges on the current belt, but perhaps restricting the number of charges that can be used at once.

Greatly appreciated.

[TheifofZ]

I think everyone is happy to help, albeit in their own grumpy ways.

Let us know how it turns out, though. For curiosity's sake, and keeping the cat alive through satisfaction.

[Rubik]

The biggest reason, as I see it, to allow multiple instances on one item is so that a player can have other enhancements along with it, so they don't lose them when they swap out belts. Suddenly losing out on +6 Str and the effects of the belt of the wide earth can be crippling if the character is wearing super-heavy armor or is carrying beyond their normal capacity.

[Silvrfox]

OP here,

Thanks for all the assistance. I am going to print out the discussion for my DM and let him make the call.

I admit I instinctively would have said no, based on stacking enchantment rules. However, I have been swayed to agreeing with most, that stacking should be permitted. I like the idea of simply increasing the charges on the current belt, but perhaps restricting the number of charges that can be used at once.

Greatly appreciated.

One last note if your still here :) You can wear belts in lots of places for flavor. (anime characters) He could only have one active at a time to hold to body slot rules. I have no problem with characters wearing 8 rings, but only 2 are active at any time.

[Rubik]

One last note if your still here :) You can wear belts in lots of places for flavor. (anime characters) He could only have one active at a time to hold to body slot rules. I have no problem with characters wearing 8 rings, but only 2 are active at any time.Ahem.

http://cdn.bleedingcool.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/PHB35_PG51_WEB.jpg

[TheifofZ]

If that were a giant sword he was wielding, he'd be perfect as a main character for a JRPG. :smalltongue: