PDA

View Full Version : Why does this cost so much?



McMindflayer
2008-01-16, 03:48 AM
I was looking at the prices of permanency and the magic item like it.

Now, I can permancy myself with greater magic fang at Cl 20 for 8,250, If I remember correctly.

Permanency CL 11: 11 x 50 GP(550) + 1500 x 5 GP(7500) = 8050 GP
Greater Magic Fang: CL 20: 20 x 10 GP = 200 GP

This would grant a person a +5 bonus to their unarmed strikes.

And yet, to get the same thing with an wonderous item, it costs 150,000gp.

I know these things are guidlines, but you'd think it would compare at least a little.

So, what I'm asking is: Why does the Amulet of Mighty fists cost so much?

Renx
2008-01-16, 03:55 AM
Permanency CL 11: 11 x 50 GP(550) + 1500 x 5 GP(7500) = 8050 GP
Greater Magic Fang: CL 20: 20 x 10 GP = 200 GP

So, what I'm asking is: Why does the Amulet of Mighty fists cost so much?

You're paying the level 20 wizard by the hour. Plus store profit. One of my friends used to DM with the rule that everything costs double the mentioned price to buy unless otherwise specified ;)

And seriously, a level 20 wizard charging 10 GP per CL ? Hardly.

McMindflayer
2008-01-16, 03:58 AM
apperently 10 gold is a lot to NPC people. Heck, only the really good alcohal is worth gold, and it's usually worth 1, maybe 2. A night at the inn is like 5. Seriously, the jump between what normal people have and the magical items you get is staggering. There is very little middle ground.

Rad
2008-01-16, 04:33 AM
Balance-wise, permanency uses a precious "slot" since you can have only one permanent spell at a time and is vulnerable to Dispel Magic and the like. Since everybody uses buffs at mid-to-high level dispelling enemies is a common practice, which makes permanency unreliable.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-01-16, 04:37 AM
Where does it say only one permanincied spell? That ruins a perfectly good plan. :smallannoyed:

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-01-16, 04:43 AM
You can have as many permanent spells as you can afford. There is no spell lot that can be filled up.

Spells with a cost above 3000 gp is not generally available, so you might have trouble finding someone willing to shell out that amount of XP.

Furthermore you probably need a Metropolis to find a CL 20 caster and a large city to find one able to cast Permanency.

Dispelling is always an issue, so I suggest that if you find a CL 20 caster you also pay for having the Permanency cast at CL 20.

Irreverent Fool
2008-01-16, 04:44 AM
Balance-wise, permanency uses a precious "slot" since you can have only one permanent spell at a time and is vulnerable to Dispel Magic and the like. Since everybody uses buffs at mid-to-high level dispelling enemies is a common practice, which makes permanency unreliable.

I don't recall the RAW saying you can only have one permanent spell at a time. You may be thinking about contingency. If I'm wrong, give us a reference. It'll seriously affect my wizard.

I think the reason you're paying more for a permanent item is essentially because a permanent item can't be completely negated by a successful dispel magic, only suppressed for a few rounds. So you're right there. Not to mention that you can pass the item on to others and it won't cease to function if you die. (If you die, you cease to be a person and become instead an 'object'. A permanent spell that requires a target of 'creature' is going to end if you stop being a creature.)

Tokiko Mima
2008-01-16, 04:50 AM
In theory (not that you'd ever find such a high level caster) but couldn't you just pay twice as much to get a CL 40 version of the same spell? Then it could never be dispelled because the DC is above the maximums for both the greater and normal versions of dispel magic.

Even better, it would allow you never to lose a buff from a dispel that wasn't specifically targetted at you, since those automatically check the highest caster level spell on you, and would never be able to dispel something with a DC 41.

Also, I noticed a line down at the bottom of the Permanency (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/permanency.htm) description:


Spells cast on other creatures, objects, or locations (not on you) are vulnerable to dispel magic as normal.

Does this mean that permanency spells you cast on yourself are not subject to dispel? :smallconfused:

Rad
2008-01-16, 04:54 AM
Balance-wise, permanency uses a precious "slot" since you can have only one permanent spell at a time and is vulnerable to Dispel Magic and the like. Since everybody uses buffs at mid-to-high level dispelling enemies is a common practice, which makes permanency unreliable.
Sorry, I guess I was thinking about (much) earlier editions

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-01-16, 04:56 AM
Does this mean that permanency spells you cast on yourself are not subject to dispel? :smallconfused:

No, but they are harder to dispel.


This application of permanency can be dispelled only by a caster of higher level than you were when you cast the spell.

loopy
2008-01-16, 05:00 AM
I'm no expert, but I think you've got permenency mixed up with contingency spells. You can only have one contingency spell active at any one time, but you can have an unlimited amount of permenent spells, as long as you can afford them, of course.

Tokiko Mima
2008-01-16, 05:02 AM
No, but they are harder to dispel.

Ah! Gotcha!

Thanks, that just sounded wrong but I couldn't figure out why exactly it would say that. :smallwink:

tyckspoon
2008-01-16, 05:56 AM
Incidentally, to answer the actual original question: The Amulet of Mighty Fists costs so much because Wizards hates Monks. The Necklace of Natural Attacks (one of the few good things to come out of Savage Species, imo) does the same thing for a much more reasonable price.

paigeoliver
2008-01-16, 06:04 AM
Savage Species is a 3.0 book and 3.0 didn't use the same math at pricing magic items as 3.5 did.

The amulet is priced correctly using wizards math and system for pricing magic items, it just isn't worth purchasing.

Just buy gauntlets with an enhancement bonus instead for the same effect with your monks (legality has been fiercely debated on forums with the text leaning more towards it being legal, but you shouldn't have a problem with it with the average GM).

Also, good look getting greater magic fang permanenced at all. It is usually pretty hard to find someone who is capable of casting both greater magic fang AND permanence (read the permanence description, permanence caster does both spells) who is at all interested in trading his XP for your loot at a ratio that is disadvantageous to him.

McMindflayer
2008-01-16, 06:28 AM
See, I understand your points. They are very good ones I wasn't sure about.

Now why such a High difference? Is Dispelling really that easy to do on a Cl 20 spell? (Which is 8,700)

I mean, I can see a big difference, Heck I can see it costing 50k GP to perform it. I mean, That's the same as a +5 to a weapon. Why must it be so different for an unarmed attack? and mind you, it's only one natural weapon. You can't use it on your bite, and your claws and your slam. Only on one of them. much like an enhancement on a weapon. It just makes no sense.

paigeoliver
2008-01-16, 07:09 AM
It covers ALL unarmed attacks and natural weapons which doubles the cost and it comes on the wrong slot which multiplies the cost by 1.5. That is why the item costs what it does.

"This amulet grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons."


See, I understand your points. They are very good ones I wasn't sure about.

Now why such a High difference? Is Dispelling really that easy to do on a Cl 20 spell? (Which is 8,700)

I mean, I can see a big difference, Heck I can see it costing 50k GP to perform it. I mean, That's the same as a +5 to a weapon. Why must it be so different for an unarmed attack? and mind you, it's only one natural weapon. You can't use it on your bite, and your claws and your slam. Only on one of them. much like an enhancement on a weapon. It just makes no sense.

d12
2008-01-16, 07:15 AM
You're right, it doesn't really make a lot of sense. I once tried to figure out what exactly they were thinking on the pricing, and the best I was able to come up with was +5 on unarmed strike (50k), +5 on natural weapons (50k), +50% for "zomg, body slot, even though there was an item with similar effect occupying the exact same slot in a 3.0 book." Now, I have no idea why you'd want to make an item in such a fashion. First, if you're going to be playing a race/monster with multiple natural attacks, why even bother with an unarmed strike? Second, if you only have an unarmed strike to deal with and no other natural attacks, why would you even bother with something that can enhance something you don't have? Third, if you're a monk, unarmed strike and natural weapon are synonymous, so you're just buying redundancy (unless you have a DM who will give you an effective +10 on it, and just that thought is probably sufficient to make most of them piss themselves). Fourth, if you're so worked up about having a neck slot item that has such an effect, just make the item for a body slot that makes sense by your rubric. Why not a shirt or vest of mighty fists or whatnot? Besides, the default wis-booster is a neck slot item (I think), and I don't hear a bunch of hyperventilating over a mental-improving item not getting the +50% "zomg, slot" penalty. Whoever threw the item together must have thought people would be playing monk dragons or something after staying up for 5 days straight and then injecting about a pound of heroin into themselves.

I would second the suggestion about just implementing it like a Necklace of Natural Weapons instead. It's more flexible and the pricing isn't as aggressively retarded. And really, in most circumstances it's only really interesting for a monk, and they don't need any more help sucking. If sucking just a little tiny bit less for a much lower price is enough to make your DM cry that much, then either show him what a real overpowered class is or point him to any forum that has any manner of discussion concerning monks so he can get a good and proper pimp-slapping.

Noo, I'm not bitter. :smalltongue:

Toliudar
2008-01-16, 07:19 AM
Also, good look getting greater magic fang permanenced at all. It is usually pretty hard to find someone who is capable of casting both greater magic fang AND permanence (read the permanence description, permanence caster does both spells) who is at all interested in trading his XP for your loot at a ratio that is disadvantageous to him.

Maybe I'm missing something here. For the spells that are for the caster-only, it does mention the caster having to be the one who casts the spell. But for permanency-ed spells that can be cast on others, or on objects, there is no such restriction.

paigeoliver
2008-01-16, 07:36 AM
Also as far as the dispelling, yes it is very likely to get dispelled.

Particularly since you are UNLIKELY to be able to get an actual 20th level caster to cast permanency for you (even being nice and ignoring the bit in permanency about the caster casting both spells).

The nicer route of doing this would require you to get both a 20th level druid and a 20th level wizard together in the same time and same place to cast the spells for money, and druids as a rule don't tend to be very mercantile.

That is the equivalent of you being YOURSELF and needing to have Paul McCartney and Alice Cooper both perform at your birthday party TOGETHER for the $300 budget you have.

In all reality the best you could probably do would be a wizard in the low teens to do the permanency, also, you wouldn't even know, it isn't like your PC has a level detector he can look through and see what level they are.

With an actual 20th level caster it MIGHT stay around for several levels or may be gone the first adventure (if your DM runs nothing but MONSTERS then it will be around for a while, if you fight things with class levels it will be gone quickly).

The lower the caster level on the permanency the faster it will vanish, and it may very well be lost incidentally without the character even knowing it. Area effect dispels can get it, and the character is VERY likely to lose it as part of "routine security" upon meeting some important person or another. Or they will simply lose it walking through a gate or doorway that dispels.

lord_khaine
2008-01-16, 09:26 AM
you overdo the difficulty of getting it done, all you have to do is make a appointment with both the wizard and the druid, then get the druid to cast his spell, then you have 20 hours to get to the wizard so he can permanency it.

still it would be a better idea to get a magic item instead, there are a few items that do the same without the retardet price modifications wizards made.
as i recall forgotten realms have bracers of striking, and some dragon magazine had a fanget ring, i dont know if there is other items as well.

Theli
2008-01-16, 09:58 AM
Actually, you don't even need the wizard. A scroll of permanency is sufficient to make a +5 Greater Magic Fang permanent. The only complication is then finding a level 20 druid, but since that spell's cost is lower than 3000 it doesn't have the added note of being hard to find. (Of course, finding such a high level npc may still be a challenge.) Also, the caster level would only be 12, making it relatively easy to dispel.

Besides, no indication is given that NPCs give a damn about EXP. If you have an irrational hatred of all things Monk regardless of any balance issues, then at least be honest about it.



The cost of the amulet really is more about what it could do in the hands of a druid or DM. The price is there to keep it from being used to cheaply improve the capability of animal companions and monsters. (Yeah, the DM can just bump their capabilities up at will. But an attempt was made to find a balance. And the existence of such an item was probably thought detrimental to that balance. The fact that this balance was largely defenestrated at a later date is irrelevant.)

It's just really, really unfortunate that monk's unarmed strike enhancement was pushed onto this item as well.

Telok
2008-01-16, 10:21 AM
Solution: Craft Wonderous Item, Knuckleduster of Greater Magic Fang.

Command Word, 3 x 20 x 1800 = 108000
Charges per Day (2), 108000 x 2/5 = 43200

Standard action to activate, and two charges a day just in case one is dispelled.

DM was confused when I took the feat for my druid. Then I made a one per day collar of Animal Growth for my animal companion. Spent a trick on training the companion to use it and the command word is the screech of an eagle.

Theli
2008-01-16, 10:29 AM
Price seems reasonable enough.

Though, as always, the DM is responsible for determining the actual price of magic items that are not already defined by RAW.

Otherwise, you get crazy stuff like that use activated true strike enhancement for much, much too low a price.

In fact, the price for that command activated animal growth could probably use some increasing over base for its relative utility.

Zain_Thorngallow
2008-01-16, 10:45 AM
The biggest reason, in my mind, for the cost involved in the Necklace of Mighty Fists is not due to its usefulness to PCs, but rather Monsters.

Is a single item that gives, say, a Dragon a +5 to hit and damage to all 6 natural attacks in a round (Bite, 2 Claws, 2 Wings, Tail Slap) worth the same as a +5 to one single weapon?

(I'd personally answer "pretty much, yeah"... a hasted high level fighter will be swinging the weapon *5* times, which isn't a far difference in my my mind.)

A better example might be something like the Giant Octopus (8 tentacle attacks) or Roper (6 Strands + Bite) . A +5 Amulet of Mighty Fist is going to make a substantial difference with this. (Ignoring of course the odd circumstances where this might actually take place...)

Basically, I think Wizards isn't so much pricing the amulet to punish Monks, but rather are ignoring Monks altogether in favour of keeping equipped Monsters somewhat lessened in power. I don't think the costs assigned are fully appropriate, personally... I'd make the amulet more expensive then a normal enchantment, but not as much as it is currently.

Or... take the "Monk unarmed strikes are treated as both Manufactured and Natural weapons," rule to its limit and allow the Monk to have his strikes enchanted normally, at standard Manufactured weapon costs.

This'll involve downtime for the Monk, as he won't be able to simply buy such off the shelf and be on his merry way... he'll need to stick around for the X number of crafting days as the worker applies (or tattoos) the enhancement runes onto his body. Pure Natural weapons will require the Amulet as normal (though perhaps rename to something more thematically appropriate.) Monks are still suffering somewhat, but at least only drain the party's time, not resources.

Roderick_BR
2008-01-16, 12:41 PM
Solution: Craft Wonderous Item, Knuckleduster of Greater Magic Fang.

Command Word, 3 x 20 x 1800 = 108000
Charges per Day (2), 108000 x 2/5 = 43200

Standard action to activate, and two charges a day just in case one is dispelled.

DM was confused when I took the feat for my druid. Then I made a one per day collar of Animal Growth for my animal companion. Spent a trick on training the companion to use it and the command word is the screech of an eagle.
The Magic Itens Compendium has one belt that casts Enlarge Person on the wearer. A necklace that casts Animal Growth is not much of an stretch.

Theli
2008-01-16, 12:58 PM
*shrugs* The MIC is it's own beast that may or may not have any semblance of balance.

Anyway, for some reason the equivalent enhancement of +5 to hit and damage for an animal is considered vastly more valuable than an equivalent +5 enhancement for a weapon. There are reasons for this. Probably having to do with the large number natural attacks, as has been covered earlier.

So I don't see how one can assume that something which grants animal growth must necessarily be about as valuable as something that grants enlarge person. (Other than the relative spell levels of both spells, I suppose.)

Animal companions aren't the only source of beast-like minions. Nothing is stopping someone from using the handle animal skill to train a beastly army, except perhaps time and resources. If you have enough resources, equipping them with magical gear may beat any kind of balance they intended for the skill ... or maybe not. I haven't done any calculations on it yet.