Mental Command for Command Word items in 3.5

[Discipol]

I can't find the price or formula for this. I see many items with a mental command trigger and after replicating the item using the rules, it only is ~1k gold more expensive

But this is the difference between Standard Action and Free Action, it can't be that cheap...

[hewhosaysfish]

Which items are you using for this comparison? And does it actually specify that it requires a free action to activate?

[Discipol]

full plate of speed, for example

[KillianHawkeye]

It is a Use-Activated item.

Many use-activated items are objects that a character wears. Continually functioning items are practically always items that one wears. A few must simply be in the character’s possession (on his person). However, some items made for wearing must still be activated. Although this activation sometimes requires a command word, usually it means mentally willing the activation to happen. The description of an item states whether a command word is needed in such a case.

Unless stated otherwise, activating a use-activated magic item is either a standard action or not an action at all and does not provoke attacks of opportunity, unless the use involves performing an action that provokes an attack of opportunity in itself. If the use of the item takes time before a magical effect occurs, then use activation is a standard action. If the item’s activation is subsumed in its use and takes no extra time use activation is not an action at all.

(emphasis added)

EDIT: The formula for a use-activated item is Spell Level x Caster Level x 2,000 gp.

EDIT EDIT: Note that, as far as I can tell, mithral full-plate of speed does not conform to the magic item pricing guidelines.

[Discipol]

what i need is distinction between a command word and mental command spell on an item. examples please

[tyckspoon]

A Command Word item usually requires a standard action to activate and also requires you to be able to speak freely. A Mental Command Word usually requires a standard action to activate and does not require you to speak, so you can trigger them while paralyzed or in the area of a Silence spell. Note that there remains a difference between a Command Word-activated item and one that merely requires you to issue a command to activate (see also the fifteen different meanings of the word 'Level' within the game system, and the distinction between a Targeted spell and aiming a spell at a target.) As far as I know the pricing guidelines consider 'Command' and 'Mental Command' to be the same thing.

[Discipol]

see, thats broken. i could activate ~6 command word items by mental command since its a free action + do my full round, in contrast to a standard action for just 1 item.

Do I understand that items you have equipped go as mental command, while non equipment command word item like a magic lantern or something take standard action?

[randomhero00]

Well technically free actions are limited by your DM. So he could easily say that that particular free action still takes as long as a standard.

[Greenish]

see, thats broken. i could activate ~6 command word items by mental command since its a free action + do my full round, in contrast to a standard action for just 1 item.

Mental command word is a standard action.

You have to think slow for the item to understand.

[randomhero00]

Mental command word is a standard action.

You have to think slow for the item to understand.

Or think a lot of words/concentrate hard/awhile. There's many possible explanations if you have any sort of imagination.

[Discipol]

Mental command word is a standard action.

You have to think slow for the item to understand.

{Scrubbed}

Imagination has nothing to do with mechanical rules, and mental command words in DMG are free action. DMG also says you can make any free action in a full round.
Concentration is a specific mechanic irrelevant to activating an item.

[Stegyre]

Try this, from psionic items: Activating a command thought psionic item is a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

It's a command word without the spoken word; same action cost.

As for armor with speed, activation is specified in the item description (MIC):
Activation: Swift (mental)

So it takes your swift action to activate it.

[Discipol]

Mental command word is a standard action.

You have to think slow for the item to understand.

Swift is acceptable ^_^ as long as I don't waste my standard. How did they get to swift?

[Greenish]

Imagination has nothing to do with mechanical rules, and mental command words in DMG are free action.

Where?

It says using an item is a standard action unless otherwise indicated. I don't see an exception for mental command words.

[Edit]: Rules Compendium says that activating a mental command item takes the same time as casting the spell the item duplicates, and in case the item doesn't duplicate a spell, it's a standard action unless otherwise specified in the item's description.

[Discipol]

srd only preferably, SC has some funky stuff there.

the thing is, haste is not swift casting.

and what about immediate action spells?

[Greenish]

the thing is, haste is not swift casting.

Too bad. Of course, since RC fails to identify itself as an errata, technically the DMG description would overrule it.

and what about immediate action spells?

What about them?

[Discipol]

would this mean you can activate as immediate action an immediate action spell?

[Greenish]

would this mean you can activate as immediate action an immediate action spell?

Yes.

[Shadowleaf]

{Scrubbed}

He's right by RAW. There is nothing stupid about it. It's a standard action.

It could be fluffed in any number of ways: You have to focus on the item and dwell into its power, you have to mentally recite a chant, etc.

[Discipol]

{Scrubbed}

[tyckspoon]

Speaking is normally also a free action. Using a Command Word item is not, regardless of whether the command is spoken or given mentally (semi-relevant note: the Magic Item Compendium changed this activation type to just 'command', as well as assigning Swift and Immediate activations where appropriate to things that were originally free or had complicated 'free but you can only do it once per turn in these specific circumstances' rules.) If it takes your Standard action to say a command word, something is happening that clearly takes more effort than normal speech.

[Discipol]

Still, Haste is not cast as a swift action.

[Stegyre]

Am I the only one not understanding what the OP wants??

@Discipol: There are no RULES for the creation of new magic items. What there are, are guidelines, all subject to GM control.

There is one such guideline for "use-activated or continuous items," which was given by KillianHawkeye. The only thing he left out as an additional multiplier, based on the duration of the spell that is being made use-activated or continuous. Note that creating a new such item is extremely problematic for exactly the reason you note in post #7: they break the action economy. IMO, such new items should not be allowed unless they are either (a) very minor or (b) very expensive.

There is also a rule for command thought items (a means of activating certain psionic items that is equivalent to command word for magic items). Both I and Greenish quoted that rule for you.

Greenish also gave the Rules Compendium correction to that rule, for any sort of item: that the activation time is the same as the casting/manifesting time for the corresponding spell/power. If you created an items capable of casting a spell with an immediate casting time, you could activate it as an immediate action.

There is also a rule for activating any sort of armor of speed: it's a swift action. How they got there is speculation. My speculation is that the ability would be pretty useless if it required a standard action.

Although you need to look a little more broadly, there is even a rule for converting a standard-action spell casting item to a swift action one: you enchant the item with a quickened version of the spell. (Equivalent mechanic for a power.) It will cost a lot more. (You've just boosted the SL +6 and the CL +12.)

There are no rules nor guidelines of which I'm aware for making a standard or swift action an immediate action. The closest I can get you is with an item that manifests Anticipatory Strike (CPsi), a 5th level, immediate action power that allows you to "take your normal action for the round at the time you manifest this power," and it costs you your next action. (Essentially, you take your action when you manifest AS instead of at your normal point in the turn order.) AS is viewed as one of the better - even overpowered - powers, which should give you some idea of just how potent it would be to convert a standard action to an immediate action.

Too bad. Of course, since RC fails to identify itself as an errata, technically the DMG description would overrule it.

I give you, from the opening paragraph:

The book you hold in your hands is the definitive guide for how to play the 3.5 revision of the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS Roleplaying Game. Years in the making, it gathers resources from a wide variety of supplements, rules errata, and rules clarifications to provide an authoritative guide for playing the D&D game.

So yes, RC is errata that will supersede the DMG.

[Greenish]

So yes, RC is errata that will supersede the DMG.

That doesn't say RC is errata, it says that RC draws (among other things) from errata.

[Stegyre]

That doesn't say RC is errata, it says that RC draws (among other things) from errata.

No.

This. Is. Sparta.

And

It "gathers . . . rules errata . . . ."

Two sentences further on, in the same opening paragraph:

When a preexisting core book or supplement differs with the rules herein, Rules Compendium is meant to take precedence.

EDIT: Now what the heck does the OP want?

[Discipol]

OP?

i have a Rogue 2 / Cleric 1 / Fighter 2 / Ranger 2(2wf, fav enemy human) / invisible blade 5 / fortune's friend 5 character in mind(level 4 now) and want to put Invisibility on as a free or swift action soon-ish.

there are high chances a permanency will be dispelled, or greater invisi be dispelled, so putting normal invisi each round is a good workaround.

we got an item crafter in the party and some income sources, so money is not that of a problem

[Stegyre]

OP?

You, the Original Poster.

i . . . want to put Invisibility on as a free or swift action soon-ish.

. . . .

we got an item crafter in the party and some income sources, so money is not that of a problem

There! Now we have something to work with.

You may not like it, but SC has the answer (or the spell): Invisibility, Swift, a bard 1 or assassin 2, personal range, swift action, 1 round invisibility spell.

Spoiler

Show

Note: Just because you or your GM may dislike some, most, or almost all of the spells in SC is no reason not to draw upon it for spells that are not objectionable. Players and GMs not only may, but should pick and choose.

Using that spell as a template and the item creation guidelines, a command word item would cost SL(1)*CL(2)*1,800 = 3,600.

Next, comes the reality check: only 3,600 for an item that can make you invisible an infinite number of times at the cost of your swift action each turn? Not bloody likely. Not when a Ring of Invisibility, requiring a standard action, costs 20,000. Slightly different effects: the Ring doesn't have the one-round duration, but not enough to justifiy the price difference.

Using the eternal wand template (basically same pricing as a standard wand, but usable twice a day, forever, instead of having 50 charges), such an item would instead cost appx. SL(1)*CL(2)*750 = 1,500 and be usable twice per day. If I were your GM, that's the template I would use: you could have a Swift Invisibility Ring (as the spell), usable a number of times per day equal to 750*charges you wanted (20 times a day = 15,000, for example).

Personally, I would not let you create a "continuous" item of this type.

But I'll just emphasize again: this is all very much a GM's judgment call.

[Discipol]

we, the guys in the party, have tried to break the game with various tricks(legal and non pun pun) so he became extremely paranoid about non core mechanics. we convinced him to let us the completes since there wheren't enough prestiges to work with.

he did allow custom spells subject to his approval

A swift action is nothing to laugh at, that's a quickened spell right there.

I am familiar with the ring of true strike discussion, but any and all seemingly broken solutions can be countered extremely easy. if our DM thinks its not easy, he will have to learn and evolve above it.lazy lazy DM

On topic of this build. My char can make Feints each round as a free action, and combined with a wand of Inflict Critical Wounds, he ignores both armor and dex :D so most of the times he has to roll above 10, which means he doesn't have to roll 1, but with fortune's friend's goodies, he never rolls 1. Did i mention that spells that require attacks can Crit on 20? And a touch attack is an attack that qualifies for Sneak Attack?

[Stegyre]

he did allow custom spells subject to his approval

Then you ought to have no problem getting Invisibility, Swift approved. It is useful, but by no means overpowered. This is not a problematic spell.

I'm not at all sure of the point or question of the rest of your post. I've given how I would price such an item. Whether others would arrive at the same conclusion, what I've described is the process.

[Discipol]

i asked him, he was blow away on how to judge the spell, since i want it Swift and 1 round only. Level 1 sounds good?