Something wrong with Mummy Rot

[cython]

I do not know how I missed it before.

In the Monster Manual, it says for Mummies that the save DC for (plain) Mummy rot is 16 and for Mummy Lord the DC is 17 (because of slightly higher Cha mod) even though it has 10 HD more from Cleric levels.

According to Supernatural Ability description (Mummy rot is Su), the save DC should be = HD/2 + Ability mod + any relevant feats.

The only way to make sense of the numbers presented in the Mummy entry at the Monster Manual is that the character levels do not count in the calculation.

Is this a mistake/typo, or is there a rule I am unaware of?

Does this also applies to Medusa, which advances by "character levels"? If so, then Medusa becomes a far less dangerous adversary having a fixed Fort DC 15.

[Particle_Man]

I thought that monster hit dice counted but class levels did not (barring exceptions). I believe that is how the abilities of half-dragons, half-celestial, etc. work.

It is like a fighter/wizard not getting extra caster levels from the fighter levels.

[Elves]

It's just an error. You're right that all Hit Dice count.

[MinimanMidget]

Most saving throws against special abilities have DCs calculated as follows:

10 + ½ the attacker’s racial Hit Dice + the relevant ability modifier.

Racial hit dice, not all hit dice.

[Gruftzwerg]

Racial hit dice, not all hit dice.

Don't ask me when those general rules are supposed to take place. I guess sole for unaltered monsters as presented in the book.

Because...

We have more specific rules for advancing monsters. Have a look into the MM I page 294:

Adding a Hit Dice

...
Adding Hit Dice to a creature improves several of its abilities, and radical increases might not follow this progression indefinitely. Compare the monster’s improved attack bonus, saving throw bonuses, and any DCs of its special abilities from the HD increase to typical characters of the appropriate level and adjust the CR accordingly.

1. "Adding Hit Dice" covers all types of HD gain. It doesn't differentiate between RHD and HD from class lvls.

2. It indicates that the DC scales accordingly to what to expect with the HD increase.


The 3.5 authors sometimes have a weird way to express themselves...

[Zanos]

Don't ask me when those general rules are supposed to take place. I guess sole for unaltered monsters as presented in the book.

Because...

We have more specific rules for advancing monsters. Have a look into the MM I page 294:


1. "Adding Hit Dice" covers all types of HD gain. It doesn't differentiate between RHD and HD from class lvls.

2. It indicates that the DC scales accordingly to what to expect with the HD increase.


The 3.5 authors sometimes have a weird way to express themselves...
It only seems like that if you completely exclude the context. The section you quoted comes after a section at the same heading level that explains how to add class levels to monsters. The Hit Dice section tells you to calculate CR increases by referencing a table of racial hit dice. And it references the advancement entries that indicate when monsters receive size increases. It seems pretty clear to me that these are separate methods of advancing monsters.

[Elves]

Racial hit dice, not all hit dice.


The saving throw (if any) against a supernatural ability is 10 + 1/2 the creature’s HD + the creature’s ability modifier (usually Charisma).

This is carried over in RC and is reflected in later published statblocks.

Is your quote from the original SRD document? d20srd.org uses the Monster Manual and RC version.
Maybe it was originally RHD only but was changed during development, which would explain the error OP noticed.

[sleepyphoenixx]

This is carried over in RC and is reflected in later published statblocks.

Is your quote from the original SRD document? d20srd.org uses the Monster Manual and RC version.
Maybe it was originally RHD only but was changed during development, which would explain the error OP noticed.

d20srd.org uses racial hit dice too, under the Reading The Monster Entries (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/intro.htm) category.

Special Attacks and Special Qualities

Many creatures have unusual abilities. A monster entry breaks these abilities into special attacks and special qualities. The latter category includes defenses, vulnerabilities, and other special abilities that are not modes of attack. A special ability is either extraordinary (Ex), spell-like (Sp), or supernatural (Su). Additional information (when needed) is provided in the creature’s descriptive text.

When a special ability allows a saving throw, the kind of save and the save DC is noted in the descriptive text. Most saving throws against special abilities have DCs calculated as follows:

10 + ½ the attacker’s racial Hit Dice + the relevant ability modifier.

The save DC is given in the creature’s description along with the ability on which the DC is based.

[Zanos]

This is carried over in RC and is reflected in later published statblocks.

Is your quote from the original SRD document? d20srd.org uses the Monster Manual and RC version.
Maybe it was originally RHD only but was changed during development, which would explain the error OP noticed.
Which statblocks? None of the monsters advanced by adding class levels in MM IV or V have adjusted their natural ability save DCs for added class level HD. There aren't a ton but the Thoon Infilitrators mind blast is DC 20(10+2(feats)+4(RHD)+4(charisma)), rather than the 22 it would be including the 4 cleric HD.

It does seem like they used total HD to calculate abilities add from templates, however.

[H_H_F_F]

Same goes for Aboleth/Mage, Hound Archon/Hero, and Harpy/Archer. No creature with racial (non template) Su abilities in the MM counts class HD, it seems.

[Gruftzwerg]

Which statblocks? None of the monsters advanced by adding class levels in MM IV or V have adjusted their natural ability save DCs for added class level HD. There aren't a ton but the Thoon Infilitrators mind blast is DC 20(10+2(feats)+4(RHD)+4(charisma)), rather than the 22 it would be including the 4 cleric HD.

It does seem like they used total HD to calculate abilities add from templates, however.

How irritating.. -.-

[Biggus]

We have more specific rules for advancing monsters. Have a look into the MM I page 294:


I'm looking at my copy of MMI and that quote isn't there. There's a section called "adding hit dice" but not called "adding a hit dice". What version of the MMI are you looking at? Mine's the original July 2003 printing.

[Elves]

d20srd.org uses racial hit dice too, under the Reading The Monster Entries (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/intro.htm) category.
It looks like this is from MM p6 in the introductory section. So it would be overruled by the actual rules for special abilities on MM p315 (which is not only the authoritative section, but also uses more authoritative language: "is" rather than "usually is"), and by RC if nothing else.

Still, interesting that there's a contradiction within the same book. Maybe it was a disconnect between writers or maybe it changed during development. Either way, easy to see where the error came from in mummy lord.

Edit

Which statblocks? None of the monsters advanced by adding class levels in MM IV or V have adjusted their natural ability save DCs for added class level HD. There aren't a ton but the Thoon Infilitrators mind blast is DC 20(10+2(feats)+4(RHD)+4(charisma)), rather than the 22 it would be including the 4 cleric HD.
Statblock errors are nothing new. MM 315 and RC 119 are clear that all HD count.

[H_H_F_F]

It looks like this is from MM p6 in the introductory section. So it would be overruled by the actual rules for special abilities on MM p315 (which is not only the authoritative section, but also uses more authoritative language: "is" rather than "usually is"), and by RC if nothing else.

Still, interesting that there's a contradiction within the same book. Maybe it was a disconnect between writers or maybe it changed during development. Either way, easy to see where the error came from in mummy lord.

I think it's plausible to assume that someone forgot that HD included class levels while writing that section.

[Elves]

I think it's plausible to assume that someone forgot that HD included class levels while writing that section.
That's RAI

[KillianHawkeye]

Why would class levels advance a monster's racial special abilities? :smallconfused:

[Zanos]

Statblock errors are nothing new. MM 315 and RC 119 are clear that all HD count.
You brought them up, not me. :smallconfused:


That's RAI
So it's RAI, but every single statblock that I've found contradicts it? That doesn't make any sense either.

[H_H_F_F]

That's RAI

Yeah, but you said
Maybe it was a disconnect between writers or maybe it changed during development.

Which seems less plausible to me than my alternative. Hence the comment.

RAW? Rule still says HD. I think between primary source rule and specific trumps general, that means that by RAW, it's half HD - just that every single monster printed is an exception to that general rule.

If you're willing to say "no, the example stat blocks just all have the same editorial error", than you'd open yourself to the retort that the general rule contains an editorial mistake.

[Elves]

So it's RAI, but every single statblock that I've found contradicts it?
Some books definitely do use the right formula. Elder Evils for example -- see Gorguth, page 22, bodak ranger 2/fighter 1/blackguard 9, with death gaze DC 24 (10 + 4 cha + 10 from 21 HD).

But even if all the statblocks disagreed, statblocks are downstream of rules.


That doesn't make any sense either.
Eh, WOTC writers not reading rules closely is nothing new or surprising.


Yeah, but you said

Which seems less plausible to me than my alternative. Hence the comment.

Sure, we should just remember there's a line between speculating about dev intent and actually using that speculation as a rules argument.

[ShurikVch]

Well, according to the Dysfunctional Rules threads, All example characters are known to be wrong - (Almost) all of these contain build errors
After all,

For his or her first Hit Die, a 1st-level character gets the maximum hit points rather than rolling (although Constitution modifiers, positive or negative, still apply).
But show me a single 1 HD monster which actually follow this rule (and before the "It's for characters - not for monsters!", words "character" and "monster" are interchangeable)

Now, about the Mummy Rot - it tends to be rather "buggy" across the sourcebooks: Mummified Ogre in Libris Mortis got it with DC 16 (with 4 HD and Cha 11 - it should be 12), and example Greater Mummy - from Deities and Demigods - lacks it altogether (even if, according to the template's RAW, it's one of two SA which it always should gain - unlike the other SA which are selectable)

FWIW, the Mummy (Libris Mortis):

Mummy rot is a supernatural disease - Fortitude save DC 10 + 1/2 mummy's HD from class levels + mummy's Cha modifier, incubation period 1 minute; damage 1d6 Con and 1d6 Cha.

[ksbsnowowl]

FWIW, the Mummy (Libris Mortis):

This is completely disingenuous. That quote is from the Mummy monster class, which is just the LA and RHD rules adapted into a class structure for game play from level 1. It is obviously referring to levels of the Mummy monster class.

[ShurikVch]

This is completely disingenuous. That quote is from the Mummy monster class, which is just the LA and RHD rules adapted into a class structure for game play from level 1. It is obviously referring to levels of the Mummy monster class.
Maybe, maybe not.

Anyway, Kazgorva (The Hateful Legacy) - mummified human druid 12 with Cha 17 - have Mummy Rot with DC 19; Azmaer Dhuurniv (Shadowdale: The Scouring of the Land) - mummified drow fighter 6 with Cha 20 - DC 18. None of those should be so high - unless HD from class levels really matter.

[spectralphoenix]

Do creatures with special attacks increase the DC for
those attacks when they gain class levels? Are they
calculated based on the creature’s new ECL or its new CR?
Unless specifically noted in a monster description, the DC
of a creature’s innate special attacks depends only on its racial
HD, and not from HD gained from class levels. A horned devil
who gained levels of fighter, for instance, would not use its
fighter HD to calculate the DC of its fear aura or stun
supernatural special attacks. A creature’s ECL or CR has no
effect whatsoever on the save DCs for its special attacks or any
other ability.
However, if the creature’s ability scores change—such as
from the increase at every 4-HD interval—that might well
affect the DCs of its special attacks. If that horned devil, for
instance, improved its Strength from 31 to 32 when it gained its
first class level (giving it 16 HD total), its stun save DC would
improve by 1. Each special attack lists the ability score upon
which it is based (such as Strength for the horned devil’s stun)


https://www.d20pfsrd.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2017/01/Main35FAQv06302008.pdf

[Elves]

FAQ is wrong again, who's surprised

[Particle_Man]

I think the FAQ *plus* the large percentage of stat block examples that only count RHD *plus* the fact that it fits "multi-classing" rules (the aforementioned fighter/wizard not counting fighter HD for wizard caster levels) carries more weight than an ambiguous description in the general rules. It seems pretty clear that RHD count but cleric HD do not count, for mummy rot.

[Elves]

I think the FAQ *plus* the large percentage of stat block examples that only count RHD *plus* the fact that it fits "multi-classing" rules (the aforementioned fighter/wizard not counting fighter HD for wizard caster levels) carries more weight than an ambiguous description in the general rules.

I don't see the logic here. How do some statblocks and an FAQ answer carry more weight than what the special ability rules very clearly say?

[Gruftzwerg]

I'm looking at my copy of MMI and that quote isn't there. There's a section called "adding hit dice" but not called "adding a hit dice". What version of the MMI are you looking at? Mine's the original July 2003 printing.
Sorry but that was my added mistake. I typed the title manually and somehow added the "a". My bad and I'm sorry for the confusion. The rest of the quote should be "copy+pasted".


It looks like this is from MM p6 in the introductory section. So it would be overruled by the actual rules for special abilities on MM p315 (which is not only the authoritative section, but also uses more authoritative language: "is" rather than "usually is"), and by RC if nothing else.

Still, interesting that there's a contradiction within the same book. Maybe it was a disconnect between writers or maybe it changed during development. Either way, easy to see where the error came from in mummy lord.

Edit

Statblock errors are nothing new. MM 315 and RC 119 are clear that all HD count.

I was sure that this had already been handled at some time and the consensus was that all HD does count towards the DC. So the rule source was MM-p315. Thanks for pointing that out =)

___


So, shall we try a RAW breakdown of this mess?

"Under the given rules, it seems to me that "Monster Entries" don't have to show you the final stats a creature has. According to "Reading Creature Entries", we only get presented the base DC's without class level. Nothing wrong with that. It never makes the claim that these are the final stats. It sole explains what it presents to the reader. Again nothing wrong, just irritating as always in 3.5...

Because the primary source for Special Ability DCs is MM-p315 and not "Reading Creature Entries". The latter just mentions what stats are presented and never claims that these stats are final..."

What do you say? Do you agree with this statement?
To me it seems to be free of RAW dysfunctions, but feels very irritating..

[Particle_Man]

Looking under monsters as races it lists monsters hit dice separately from its class levels. This it seems that, just as level has multiple meanings and sometimes have to be deduced by context, so does the term hit dice. Sometimes hit dice means racial hit dice and other times it means total hit dice. This any reference to Hit Dice setting monster DC could be interpreted RAW as racial hit dice, and this interpretation would match the faq, most examples of monsters with class levels that only use racial hit dice to set dcs for monster abilities, etc.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monstersAsRaces.htm

[Elves]

So, shall we try a RAW breakdown of this mess?
There's no mess. To find the formula for su abilities we go to the primary source -- the special ability rules. That's it.

If you're bugged by the apparent contradiction within MM, remember that the primary source now is Rules Compendium, which doesn't include the racial hit dice quote at all.


Looking under monsters as races it lists monsters hit dice separately from its class levels. This it seems that, just as level has multiple meanings and sometimes have to be deduced by context, so does the term hit dice. Sometimes hit dice means racial hit dice and other times it means total hit dice. This any reference to Hit Dice setting monster DC could be interpreted RAW as racial hit dice, and this interpretation would match the faq, most examples of monsters with class levels that only use racial hit dice to set dcs for monster abilities, etc.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monstersAsRaces.htm
I see the bit at the end that you mean:
"A monster with Hit Dice of 1 or less, a level adjustment, and class levels"

you're parsing it as
"A monster | with [racial] Hit Dice of 1 or less, a level adjustment, and class levels"

but it could also, more simply, be read as
"[A monster with Hit Dice of 1 or less], a level adjustment, and class levels"

Eg, a displacer beast is a monster with 6 Hit Dice and you're adding class levels onto it.

And the rest of that section does use "Hit Dice" normally.

I see what you're noticing but it seems a little strained to cherrypick a quote that isn't 100% foolproofed in its wording, claim that it means the word means something else, and then argue that therefore another rule, which is very clearly written, has a hidden meaning.


It's clear that some writers at WotC thought it was RHD only, but that doesn't put any pressure on us to twist the words away from their clearest meaning to conform to that view. And there are cases like Elder Evils that use the HD formula, so there's no unified theory here anyway.

[CopperElfCleric]

Mummy Rot was a brutal affliction. One of the most powerful of all undead.

[cython]

My problem is that if we take it as only racial HD counts for the DC saves of the special abilities while making sense from the monster design concept, it breaks the game.

I will give more detailed examples.



Mummy Rot was a brutal affliction. One of the most powerful of all undead.

Yes, when facing a plain mummy at level 5 where your saves are low vs a Fort DC 16 and lack resources. You are going to appreciate a paladin's immunity to diseases and cure disease ability. But at level 15 against a Mummy Lord, a Fort save of DC 17 is a walk in the park. Not scary at all, who needs a paladin.

For Mummies, there is a partial solution because we can advance the racial HD where the CR increases by 1 for every 4 HD advancements. By making the mummy more monstrous and less in its ability to advance as a cleric. However, not all monsters have this option. Some can be advanced only through "character levels" like medusa and harpy.

For these creatures, the game breaks down completely.

Take a Harpy. A CR 4 creature with a captivating song of Will DC 16 with a 300ft range. At level 4, the party will be scared of Harpies. Low saves and not many resources. A Harpy archer is a CR 11 and its signature move has a Will DC of 17. At level 11 the party will have significantly better saves and resources, so much so that they will treat the Harpy Archer more like a flying archer monster than a mystical creature whose seducing song brings men to their doom.

Medusa is a CR 7 creature and anyone looking at her must save Fort DC 15. It is a scary monster at level 7, but add character levels (the only way to advance it as a monster) to reach CR 20 and lose the uniqueness of the particular monster because the DC remains fixed. Even with feats like Ability Focus and Irresistible Gaze taking the DC from 15 to 19. Still, at level 20 a Fort save of DC 20 is a walk in the park. A plain fighter would have at level 20 an approximate Fort save 24 = 12 base+6 Con mod+6 resistance+other. Meaning that the party at 20 lvl will not be afraid of looking at a CR 20 medusa. So what is the point of a medusa at CR 20?

In contrast, let's see a creature where we advance it only through its racial HD, the Purple Worm. It is a CR 12 with its signature ability being poison at Fort DC 25. We will scale it to a CR 20, it needs to become 37 HD and +1 CR for change in size. So at CR 20, the new Fort DC will be 40 = 10 + 37HD /2 + 12 Con mod; the new constitution is 34 = 25 original + 5 from new HD +4 size. It is DC 40 without even taking any feats to boost it. I think it is high enough that will force the party to share spells to boost their saves and immunities. And that's the point of the game. At high levels players can solve any problems but it does not mean that they are any monsters that can still be formidable antagonists.

I think that the game designers were of two minds when these rules were written. But only one of the options maintains the scariness of the monsters at high levels by advancement.

[KillianHawkeye]

The thing you seem to be missing is a monster with a bunch of class levels will have new things it can do (as well as level appropriate equipment to help them), whereas your purple worm example still just has the same attack. He really needs his DC to get better, while other monsters don't.

[Elves]

IMO, best to start a different thread to discuss which formula is better. Otherwise this one becomes a muddle of is and ought.

[cython]

The thing you seem to be missing is a monster with a bunch of class levels will have new things it can do (as well as level appropriate equipment to help them), whereas your purple worm example still just has the same attack. He really needs his DC to get better, while other monsters don't.

Exactly my point. By adding character levels without advancing the DC of special attacks of the monster, the monster has additional options, but all the options become weak to the point of being useless overall. A Mummy Lord as a CR 15 presented in the Monster Manual is basically a cleric of 10th level, meaning the Mummy Lord is weak in its monstrous special abilities and a weak spellcaster (compared to a 15th level party). Overall, the Mummy Lord does not project the same fear as a plain Mummy against a party at level 5.

Items can boost DC by enhancing abilities, but +6 in ability only increases DC by 3 points vs an item that boosts saves can be +6 boost. Items overall help the players, not the monsters.

I do not expect a DC of 40 of Purple Worm in the case of a CR 20 Medusa. The DC for the petrifying case by counting all the HD will be (including Ability Focus and Irresistible gaze and assume an 18 Charisma, a plain Medusa has a 15 Charisma):

Fort DC 27 = 10 base + (6 racial HD + 13 associating character levels)/2 +4 Cha mod +4 feats

Otherwise, without the character levels:

Fort DC 21 = 10 base + (6 racial HD)/2 +4 Cha mod +4 feats

At level 20 the party's Fort save will be around 20, with fighters maybe a little higher and others a little behind. A Fort DC 21 is too low to even invest with items, it is a lost cause.

A Fort DC 27 is not too high but high enough that with the right investment and tactics will make the players still want to avoid looking at a CR 20 Medusa.

This does not break the game, it just makes it interesting.

[ShurikVch]

How about to just replace all the Mummies with Mummified Creatures? Mummified Creature (at least - for 1 HD base) definitely adds class levels to DC of Mummy Rot...

[Zanos]

My problem is that if we take it as only racial HD counts for the DC saves of the special abilities while making sense from the monster design concept, it breaks the game.
That's the reason why monsters have a different formula for calculating their CR when their class levels don't synergize with things they're already good at.

[KillianHawkeye]

I just don't find it wrong that a high level party should still be worried about mummy rot or a medusa's petrifying gaze the same way a low level party would. Those simply aren't the sort of monster a high level party should be afraid of, and if you disagree there's nothing stopping individual DMs from making those monsters' abilities stronger.

I mean, despite arguing back and forth on which rules take precedence or what the designers' intent might have been, nobody here is stopping anyone from picking whichever of the two options they want in their own games. Stop trying to "be right on the Internet" and just play the game how you want and let others do the same.

[H_H_F_F]

I mean, despite arguing back and forth on which rules take precedence or what the designers' intent might have been, nobody here is stopping anyone from picking whichever of the two options they want in their own games. Stop trying to "be right on the Internet" and just play the game how you want and let others do the same.

Well, yeah. Any DM can run it how they like. However, there are 3 main reasons to have these discussions regardless: People here like to discuss how powerful or not powerful certain options are. Having an agreed upon set of rules helps with that, just like it helps running a table smoothly.
In some contexts, having established RAW is important. There are DMs out there who like to play "by RAW" instead of having to do the leg work of making sense of the system themselves. There are also forum competitions, of course, that can't work without establishing a common set of rules - and doing that with a legal approach to the source material makes sense.
For some folks, lawyering is just fun. We LIKE trying to use the established rules of the system to try and make sense of the mess that is 3.5. It's not about playing one way or another being right or wrong - rules discussion is simply a hobby unto itself.

[KillianHawkeye]

Sure, but when the discussion becomes sufficiently circular, it's time to just admit that the rules are unclear. Pile of evidence A points to one outcome, while exhibits B and C point to another.

There's no way to establish one definite answer.; it's now "choose your own adventure" territory.

[Elves]

There's no way to establish one definite answer
There literally is, it's called rules precedence. It exists exactly for cases like this where different sources contradict.

You seem to be saying "the very fact that there's a debate means there isn't an answer", which doesn't check out. And I don't see anyone in this thread using circular logic.

[Rleonardh]

Off topic a bit.
Adding cleric, sorcerer, or fighter/barbarian/ranger to monsters can up the threat.

Also you can always pump the dc of your monsters for even more fun.

[cython]

I do not want to be right, but I wrote this thread because I am confused.

For the last two decades, I have been playing D&D, mainly as a DM, on and off, mostly low to mid-level campaigns (not higher than 10). And to be consistent, I am a stickler to the rules, mainly because that is a good way to be fair to the players. So I was using the stat-blocks of monsters from the Monster Manual as is, no questions asked. For levels below 10, this is perfect. However, currently, I am running a campaign where the party is already 10+ levels, and I need to design appropriate monsters for the level. However, I became very confused when the combination of monster and character levels blurred out the particular monsters' special abilities.

Of course, I can change the rules... but this is a slippery slope of constantly changing things and creating a mess. For example, I could ignore the advancement limitation for a medusa "character level" and instead increase the medusa HD as a monstrous humanoid. This way, the DC for the special abilities scales faster, making a deadly medusa, maybe too fast, but at least the medusa flavor is preserved. But what stops me from applying the same to any other monster or maybe overdoing this rule-breaking to the point that the players do not like it? Things can get out of hand and it is time-consuming to keep everything in place... time that I do not have.

This is why I want to stay close to the original rules with zero or minimal tweaking. The rules give a solid point of reference.

I have to say your responses have been very helpful in cleaning up my confusion. I will count the total HD in the DC of the special abilities. Now whether this is RAW or RAI or something else, well... I am not the right person to answer this, but I would be interested to know.

[ShurikVch]

Note: Lurking Terror PrC (Libris Mortis) adds its class level to DC of all monstrous special attacks (i. e. for Mummy - it's Despair and Mummy Rot)
This can be further advanced via Uncanny Trickster and Legacy Champion PrC

Additionally, DC can be further boosted by:
-feats - Ability Focus (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsterFeats.htm#abilityFocus) (+2), Power Surge (+1; Dragon #313), and Sudden Ability Focus (+2 1/day; stacks with Ability Focus (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsterFeats.htm#abilityFocus); Tome of Magic);
-magic items - Veil of Allure (+2; 7000 gp; face slot; Magic Item Compendium), Cloak of Charisma, Circlet of Persuasion, etc.