[3.5] Query About Pricing Custom Magic Items

[Thurbane]

Firstly, let me get this out of the way, I am the DM. We clear? Mmmkay :smallbiggrin:

This is for items I will be handing out as treasure and/or equipping NPCs with.

Wondering if there are any rules or guidelines about modifying custom items of spells, and how it affects pricing.

Specifically, in two areas:

A.) Spell limitation: lets say you have a custom item of Alter Self, 1/day, CL 3. But you can only use it to assume the form of, let's say, a Troglodyte. Should the additional limitation on how the spell normally works affect the pricing? If so, is there any precedent I should look to?

B.) Activation times: MIC has several items that are Swift or Immediate activation times. Yet the pricing doesn't reflect the cost of a Quickened version of the spell. Any idea how they handled the pricing of this, or was it literally throwing a dart at a board?

All input welcomed.

Cheers - T

[Fizban]

It seems to depend on the writer. Those that think you should be happy for the privilege of using magic without being a caster will charge full price for the most narrow and useless options, while others I'm sure are giving a price cut. Nothing written, no examples off the top of my head, but that's the impression I've got from various items. Better to focus on what the item actually does rather than the spell level in this case: Alter Self (Trog) is effectively a +6 AC buff for most people with some cosmetic side effects, depending on duration you can compare to other items you find reasonable (the fact that no other spell matches that bonus for ages is telling). Or bluntly: any shapechanging item should be priced according to the stuff it grants, not the level of the overpowered spell it's copying. In theory those spells are supposed to be balanced by needing an actual caster's daily resources and/or being personal-only, but putting them in low-level items breaks that wide open. I purged all the cheap short-range teleportation items out of the MiC for example.

For swift/immediate effects, most of them are much shorter duration than the original spells. They trade that duration for the convenience of not having to guess when to buff up and planning on not needing the usual length. Many of the MiC items are altered versions of items from older books that had prices and effects reduced and altered to make them more enticing, with no real guidelines other than eyballing it (there's a note about it somewhere in the book), which included changing some to swift/immediates. For example, Storm Gauntlets already had a bit of free stuff compared to their formula pricing (in MoF if I remember), but MiC cut their price to half or less of the original, making it dirt cheap.

I think the swift/immediate healing/temp hp items might deserve a special mention. They could be valued more as extra hp, so an average of 10 points of healing on a 10th level character is actually only +2 con for the fight, untyped, or similar calculations. They might also have extra price slashing since they don't have the other benefits of a con bonus and you can't refill the hp.

For narrowed spell choices that aren't obviously copying something else I'd give a discount based on how much of the spell relies on versatility. A spell with the main draw of "pick energy type on casting" that's limited is probably worth a 25% or something more complicated like reducing it's effective spell level by 1. If it's a side flavor function it might end up a freebie, see the Phoenix/Celestial helmets which also had their effects changes and prices slashed.

I'd do some digging and more examples but I should be asleep right now.

[Curmudgeon]

The spell price formula is the fallback when you can't come up with a price using one of the higher-priority techniques. So Alter Self spell pricing isn't relevant when what you're really getting is +6 Natural Armor. Thus my answer to your question about offering a discount relative to the spell formula is an emphatic no. There's already an answer in the Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values table (file:///D:/FRP/Hypertextd20/www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm#tableEstimatingMagicItemGol dPieceValues):

Natural armor bonus (enhancement) is priced as Bonus squared × 2,000 gp, or 72,000 gp.
Now, this price assumes a continuous effect, and you would rightly offer a substantial reduction for 30 minutes, once daily. But that's your starting point, not the ridiculously low spell effect price. If you figure a straight linear extrapolation of the duration you'll get 1/48th the all-day benefit, for a cost of 1,500 gp. I think that's pretty close to right.

[Thurbane]

OK, Alter Self/Troglodyte was probably a poor example.

How about a custom item of Glitterdust 1/day that can only be activated during daylight hours under an open sky?

Or an item of Enervation 1/day that can only affect Monstrous Humanoids (if the ray hits any other creature type it fizzles without effect, but the daily use is still wasted)?

[ZamielVanWeber]

OK, Alter Self/Troglodyte was probably a poor example.

How about a custom item of Glitterdust 1/day that can only be activated during daylight hours under an open sky?

Or an item of Enervation 1/day that can only affect Monstrous Humanoids (if the ray hits any other creature type it fizzles without effect, but the daily use is still wasted)?

Enervation that only affects monstrous humanoids wouldn't be very good except to people who could identify them as monstrous humanoids and even then has a small fail chance. So let us say: 10080 for Command Word Enervation 1/day; I would then probably cut if by half, unless monstrous humanoids are common, then 30%, or rare, 70%.

As for glitterdust that would be 2160. Daylight hours under an open sky is going to be a pretty common occurrence. Parties tend to sleep at night and adventure during the day. Open sky is a little more limiting in theory, but on the road from place to place this will be pretty much 1/day Glitterdust. I would say 10% unless you know you are going into the Underdark a lot.

[gadren]

At the end of the day, you use existing items and the formulas to get an idea of what the item should be worth, but beyond that it is a best guess.
This is exactly what the WotC writers do - there's a reason the prices have varied on later printings of the same item.

If you have a specific item and want input on how much it should be worth from the more experienced DM's here, feel free to post it and ask.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

A.) DMG page 282 gives examples of price reductions for items that require a specific skill/class/alignment/etc. to activate, so limiting an otherwise versatile item's function to a single mode should have a similar reduction. I would make this one ~20% cheaper.

B.) Items that are modal, such as a flaming sword, should not require much effort to activate/deactivate their effect. DMG p288 under Creating Wondrous Items says to "refer to Table 7-33 on page 285 and use the item prices in this chapter (and presumably other books) as a guideline." Items that would not be worthwhile if they required a standard action to activate, but not too powerful if they could be used as a move action or a swift action, could easily have their activation reduced to those actions. Items that could have a swift activation, but would be more appropriate as an immediate activation, could easily be switched over to that one. You have the existing items to set a precedent, so just use your judgement on what you feel would be an appropriate price for the value of the item's effect.

[Troacctid]

The writers of the Magic Item Compendium actually shared some of the content from their internal design documents for pricing magic items in this article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20070316a), and they're pretty on-point, I think. I suggest giving it a read.

[Fizban]

I'd disagree that Glitterdust under daylit open sky is worth very much. For one, encounters while going from place to place are not usually important encounters in my experience, just filler or random. Unless the campaign is extremely outdoor focused like Red Hand of Doom, I'd expect most encounters to take place indoors. Second, what the spell is used for. Glitterdust is used primarily as a blinding spell, but with DC 13 it won't be very good at that anymore, making it's primary function the revealing of invisible creatures. If I'm expecting an ambush by invisible attackers, it would likely be indoors where I'd have less room to maneuver (and might be in range to detect them to target it in the first place). If I'm expecting to use it aggressively it will be in enclosed areas where I can corner the target to hit with the narrow area, or in important encounter areas when a foe tries to flee. My parties always seemed to be running operations in the middle of the night as well. So on the whole, Glitterdust under open sky during the day is weak enough I'd make it either an added flavor power or give it a sharp discount starting around 50%.

Enervation or vs monstrous humanoids only? Maybe if it were a more important creature type like dragon or evil outsider, but I wouldn't even place an item that specific. For an important creature type that will be part of the campaign a smaller discount in the 20-30%/-1 spell level range again, as long as there are still some significant fights without that creature type.

Edit: I keep saying "-1 spell level," and realize that can also be phrased in percentages. Assuming you don't reduce the caster level, a 4th level spell with a narrowed function priced at -1 level is getting a 25% discount. A 2nd level spell doing the same gets a 50% discount, and so on. That makes a lot of sense too, since a more powerful spell will naturally have a much bigger impact so discounting it becomes less of a good idea no matter how narrowed it is. And indeed, I'd given the narrow Glitterdust a 50%, while I'd been thinking of the 4th level range when I'd said 25% (Polymorph and unspecified buffs, say Fire Shield or something).

I also checked out the article link, sadly while interesting it wasn't all that insightful. It would have been nice if they'd actually posted the full document, but it's main point has already been said here (compare to existing items), with a side of thinking from the buyer's perspective, which I guess is necessary for some people (who don't already do it)?

[Thurbane]

The writers of the Magic Item Compendium actually shared some of the content from their internal design documents for pricing magic items in this article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20070316a), and they're pretty on-point, I think. I suggest giving it a read.

Thanks, will definitely check that out.

Thanks everyone for the replies!