Reverse engineering 3/day use items to determine unlimited-use cost

[Xarteros]

Looking at the Bracers of Entangling Blast (MIC), 2000gp, 3/day swift command, but any example would do

It lets you halve the damage of your next spell or SLA to create an entangling effect (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#entangled) on the targets of your spell/SLA.

Now, I'm trying to play a bit of a support Warlock, not trying to out-dps the fairly newbie players in my party, but I don't want a limited version of these bracers.

The rules for item creation state that the cost of an item is divided by (5/Charges per day), so the cost of these Bracers ought to have been divided by 1.66 (5/3) to get to the 2000gp mark.

Doesn't that same rule mean something with 5/day charges is the same cost as something with no limitation on charges (5/5=1, anything divided by 1 is unchanged)?

Entangling Blast is based off the Web spell, which is level 2, minimum caster level 3, use activated for *1800gp which would total 10,800gp. If I made that 3/day it would bring the cost down to 6,480gp, despite the actual price being 2000gp. There's also the factor that the normal *1800 command price doesn't have any rules for making swift, immediate or mental commands instead of standard verbal commands, which would probably increase the price further.

Herein lies my conundrum. I am willing to pay 10,800 for an unlimited use version of the item, but what is the actual appropriate cost?

[Lokiron]

An initial estimate could use the formula 2000/3*5 = 3333 ~ 3500 gp. But this is likely too cheap if you're willing to pay over 10 Kgp. Really, if you're willing to pay 10800 gp, and you are not a fool, it's probably worth just that.

[NevinPL]

You're missing the most important thing - WotC "took major liberty" when pricing items (supposedly to make them less game breaking).
So all those "tables", are more a suggestion, than a rule, especially if you're the DM.

[Xarteros]

An initial estimate could use the formula 2000/3*5 = 3333 ~ 3500 gp. But this is likely too cheap if you're willing to pay over 10 Kgp. Really, if you're willing to pay 10800 gp, and you are not a fool, it's probably worth just that.
That's the initial value I came to when I first thought of reverse-engineering it, but it felt waaaaay too cheap for an unlimited use copy. The thing that makes me want to avoid just taking it at 10800gp is that even still, it's only priced for a standard action command, compared to a swift action command. I can't really find any good precedent or general rule on any of the forums on what rough cost increase you should have for having a faster activation for your magic items (or mental activation vs command words). My DM isn't as versed in item creation as me either, so asking him for a ruling ends up with him asking me to find some precedent if possible.


You're missing the most important thing - WotC "took major liberty" when pricing items (supposedly to make them less game breaking).
So all those "tables", are more a suggestion, than a rule, especially if you're the DM.

I know they're just guidelines, but they're meant to be there to follow if there's no similar item to compare prices to. I don't think I know any item that has both charge/day and limitless versions without also having different actual effects (Like lesser vs greater cloaks of displacement, greater is limited in use/day but 50% miss, compared to lesser being unlimited 20% miss)

I mean, I'd gladly refer the price to a similar item if I knew of one

[sleepyphoenixx]

Entangling Blast is based off the Web spell, which is level 2, minimum caster level 3, use activated for *1800gp which would total 10,800gp. If I made that 3/day it would bring the cost down to 6,480gp, despite the actual price being 2000gp. There's also the factor that the normal *1800 command price doesn't have any rules for making swift, immediate or mental commands instead of standard verbal commands, which would probably increase the price further.

Keep in mind that the bracers don't actually cast any spell. They add an effect to your spell/SLA. They also halve damage, which further reduces the cost.
I know the difference doesn't matter much to a Warlock, but just because an item is more useful for you than a traditional spellcaster doesn't mean it gets more expensive if you buy it.
Also Entangled isn't that powerful a condition. Sure, they're useful, but i think the price is fine as it is.

If you're that worried about pricing just buy several of them and switch between fights. Or just stack twice the uses for twice the price.
6 uses/day should be plenty for most day. 9 should definitely last you all day in any campaign that's even near the normal encounter rate.

There's a definite tendency to overvalue at-will items anyway, for both players and DMs.
When in most cases an item with limited uses/day or even limited charges is effectively the same thing in all but the most action-packed campaigns.

[Lokiron]

If 2000 gp is a fair price for 3/day, then you already know the effect is not too crazy. 8000 gp for unlimited is not too cheap.

[Fizban]

If something has a limit, that means it is not meant to be unlimited. Especially in MiC, many items have extra low prices specifically because they have sharp limits. Meanwhile there are items that already have 5/day use limits. Does that mean they should actually be unmlimited? No, it illustrates the fact that limited is limited. Many of the "unlimited" items people try to pretend are formula RAW would actually be just fine. . . as 5/day items.

[Xarteros]

If something has a limit, that means it is not meant to be unlimited. Especially in MiC, many items have extra low prices specifically because they have sharp limits. Meanwhile there are items that already have 5/day use limits. Does that mean they should actually be unmlimited? No, it illustrates the fact that limited is limited. Many of the "unlimited" items people try to pretend are formula RAW would actually be just fine. . . as 5/day items.

With all due respect, I see literally no reason whatsoever that this would be the case. There is always a more powerful item that costs more, but it doesn't always have the same power or function in the same way. I could make an unlimited use item of Planar Bubble (Fire), Avoid Planar Effects and Firestorm and just walk about calling down Maximised and Enlarged Firestorms forever. The cost is a representative of its level of power, so things of similar power have similar costs. Having an unlimited pair of bracers that ACTUALLY replicate the web spell would be more useful than just having the Entangling Blast effect, and they are only 10800gp (for lack of comparable items).

I really don't see why it's unreasonable to want an unlimited one, after all it halves my damage and only affects creatures I hit with my damaging SLA's. The point here for me is that I want to refrain from doing too much damage whilst still being helpful, but I don't want the other players knowing that I'm playing on EZ mode to give them more of the spotlight.

My point about 5 charge items is that by the guidelines of creation, they should be no different in cost, which is a point of confusion since I'm well aware of how many 5/day items there are. Considering there's no more recent magic item creation guidelines that I'm aware of, I raised that point for clarification, since my DM asked if that's how you could reverse-engineer the cost (The same formula Lokiron was using).

[ericgrau]

1. See if unlimited use would break the game or the world. If so the cost is "no".
a. Game: Will it break in a fight.
b. World: Can the players shatter the economy or other workings of the world with it?
2. Yeah 5/3 cost is usually about right.
3. Even then it's still only a guideline, a starting point. The proper cost is as high as the players will pay for it. Not so little that everyone gets one on every character, not so much that nobody ever gets one. Somewhere in between.

For the bracers yes 5/3 for unlimited seems fine. It's not any more broken than the 3/day bracers in this particular case. The bracers are not super broken either way because entangled is not immobile. You can still move at half speed and besides that it only imposes some small stat penalties. -2 to attack rolls, -4 dex for 1d3 rounds, DC 15+SL concentration checks to cast.

[Necroticplague]

I'd put it roughly in the 11k range. That's roughly the cost of a feat, as per Arms and Armor, and Bracers of Entangling Blast at-will is roughly equal to the Entangling Exhalation feat for Dragonfire Adepts (arguably worse: Blasts miss, Breath doesn't).

[Troacctid]

There isn't a hard formula that you can use. You have to eyeball it based on other similar magic items. Here (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20070316a) is an article from the team that worked on the Magic Item Compendium that shares the guidelines they used when creating items for the book.

The reason items like this are 3/day is because they're targeted for low-mid level PCs. The daily limit allows them to sit at a price point that's actually affordable for those characters.

Similar existing items would include the Codex Advocare from Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, which is a bit overpriced at 20,000 gp, and the chasuble of fell power, greater, which is a bit overpriced at 18,000 gp.

[ericgrau]

You could just carry 2 of them for 4,000 gp and be covered 95% of the time anyway. If unlimited is broken for near that price, then they're already broken at 3/day. Entangle isn't that great: half speed, -2 attack rolls, -4 dex, DC 15+SL concentration check to cast. Even so the item is very strong for its price and is a bit under-costed even as written.

[Nifft]

If something has a limit, that means it is not meant to be unlimited.
Winged Boots exist, and provide limited flight.

Therefore, unlimited flying is not meant to be?

I reject the foundation of this argument.


Many of the "unlimited" items people try to pretend are formula RAW would actually be just fine. . . as 5/day items.
It's true that the DMG guidelines are not a good predictor of price, especially not for unlimited use items.

(They're not RAW, of course, since the guidelines are not rules.)

However, that fact is NOT an argument against the possibility of those items having a fair price, nor is it true that such items should categorically never be allowed.

======

So, how would I price this thing?

First, I'd assess the internal balance:

- Opportunity cost (body slot, check)
- Action cost (Swift activation, check)
- Drawback (reduced damage, check)

... so it looks pretty good. Even if it were always available to use, there are many times that it would not be optimal to use. That means it's not a strictly additive upgrade, so it's not a no-brainer.

This means I'd probably allow the item to exist.

In terms of pricing for my own games, I'd probably put this at 10k gp.


How would I find the price?

1/ If it were used every round of combat, how many rounds would that be per day at maximum? (You'll need to calculate this yourself for your campaign.) That number, multiplied by the (2k/3) for the limited use item, would give you an outside maximum price. This is mostly a sanity check. I picked ~20 rounds of combat per day, and ended up at 13k as an upper bound for the item.

2/ If it were a separate effect, what level would that effect be? In this case, there's a great data point: Entangling Ectoplasm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/entanglingEctoplasm.htm), a level 1 psionic power. So this is a Swift action Entangling Ectoplasm which also reduces your attack damage by half.

3/ Is this item like a feat? Yeah, it's like the Extra Invocation feat, except it's for an invocation which can't be taken normally. Feats seem to be priced around 10k gp.

4/ Around what level do I want this to be available? In this case, with the MIC 3/day item costing only 2k gp, it seems like an interested PC will be able to see if the effect is worth having in her arsenal pretty early. If she likes it, then having an unlimited version available around 8th or 9th level seeps reasonable.

[Jay R]

This is a judgment call, and nobody but the DM has any say.

Reverse engineering a WotC price is useless, because many of them are exceptions to their own rules. So the very idea of reverse engineering an item, is something only the DM of that game can rule on.

If you build it from scratch using the item creation rules, you can present the DM a valid reason for the price you think it's worth. But reverse engineering from another item price does not provide a justification.

Ask the DM.

[Xarteros]

Thanks to everyone who helped pitch some relevant numbers!

My DM decided that the feat-equivalence of 10-11k was a fine enough number (although I think he'd have said yes to basically anything, he's really not familiar with magic item rules XD). So 10800gp seems to suit the price bracket the best =)

[Jowgen]

Multiply the cost by 5.

And no, this is not just a rule of thumb I pulled out of my infinite layers of the abyss.

MIC (p. 104) features the Gauntlets of Throwing, which let you imbue you melee weapon attacks with throwing and returning for one round as a swift action 3/day. CL 3, costs 2000 GP.

PGtF (p. 123) has the Glove of Taarnahm the Vigilant, which does the exact same thing except continous, and has the same spells as prerequesites. CL 7, costs 10000 GP.

Both are 3.5 books, released just 3 years apart, and the Gauntlets were clearly meant to be the lower-level accessable version of the Gloves, as the MIC do. Clearly, a multiplier of 5 is exactly what the writers had in mind when leveling the original gloves down. For any similar case, there is no reason not to apply the exact same concept.

Now there might be some special case. Healing Belt, for example, is a mixtures of 3/day and skill bonus and the ability to burn multiple charges. It's not a straight forward item, and thus would need some adjucation.

EDIT: So yeah, 10.800 certainly falls in the right ballpark.