# Magic Item Compendium



## DungeonmasterCal (Mar 12, 2007)

Got mine today! It's my new preciousssss!


----------



## eris404 (Mar 12, 2007)

OK - so give us details, man!


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 12, 2007)

Yes! I wanna know more about it! Like what kinds of armor and weapons we got!


----------



## DungeonmasterCal (Mar 12, 2007)

Well, you've seen the ToC on the Wizards' site, and read the previews about augment crystals and the like.  But after just a short thumbing through it, I have to say I'm pretty impressed.  

I like the way it's organized.  Things are pretty easy to find, though in some cases the illustration for a particular item might actually 3 pages or so over.  There are psionic and incarnum items as well.

The relics are interesting.  They're not the uber items most folks are used to, but they are still rare and powerful.  They demand the character who uses them be of strong faith (clerics, for example), or if not a cleric, a feat that allows a character to be of a very pious nature to use the item.  To use them, the wielder has to give up a spell slot of one level or another.  

The magic item sets are really interesting.  If you have the complete set, other powers or uses can be uncovered.  

The illustrations, for the most part are stunning.  Some we've seen in the original books where the items came from, but many are new.  I have to say this may be one of the best illustrated books I've ever laid eyes on.

I've not had time to read the new pricing guidelines, however.  There are tables that offer "level appropriate" magic items, as well, to aid in placing treasure.  And a great random item generator that calls to mind the "Diablo" system.

There are better qualified reviewers on ENW than I, but hopefully this helps a bit!


----------



## DungeonmasterCal (Mar 12, 2007)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Yes! I wanna know more about it! Like what kinds of armor and weapons we got!




Well, they've collected them from a great many pre-existing sources, but there are new ones, as well.  They layout for weapon qualities actually read like spell descriptions, so finding a quality and its description are right there.  

The specific weapons and armor are laid out equally well.  Easy to find, with nice bits of fluff about some of them (the relics, especially, have nice fluff bits).

Each item lists the body slot it fits, it's activation time, it's cost, etc.  I can't really say anything bad about the book from what little I've had time to read.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Mar 12, 2007)

I thought that the MIC wasn't due out for another week?

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 12, 2007)

Olaf,

Who knows? I just know I pre-ordered mine today from Amazon. They are saying the 14th but that might change.

Cal,

Thanks. Okay so what stands out to you as the most powerful sword in the book? Or at least a sword that screams "I must be a plot hook!" That kind of thing.


----------



## TwinBahamut (Mar 12, 2007)

Have they done anything to make rods and staves worth spending money on?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Mar 12, 2007)

I had thought I was done buying new books for a while, but this seems like a really good purchase to me.


----------



## Deekin (Mar 12, 2007)

Psionic item details! Now!


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Mar 12, 2007)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Olaf,
> 
> Who knows? I just know I pre-ordered mine today from Amazon. They are saying the 14th but that might change.
> 
> ...




Did you get the e-mail I sent you regarding the AoW poster map Nightfall?

Olaf the Stout


----------



## DungeonmasterCal (Mar 12, 2007)

I ordered mine from Walmart.com last week.  It came in 10 days later, and that's with a "delay for lack of stock".  

I'll try to provide more details later this evening.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Mar 12, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> I had thought I was done buying new books for a while, but this seems like a really good purchase to me.




I'm all over the MIC.  I still love looking at my Encyclopedia Magics from 2E so buying this is a no-brainer for me.

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 12, 2007)

Olaf,

Yeah I got your last email. I'm sorry I didn't respond sooner. I'll send you a reply when I get my hands on it some time Saturday. 

Cal,

Here's hoping Amazon does better.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 13, 2007)

More details here:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=805754

Cheers!


----------



## yipwyg42 (Mar 13, 2007)

*Magic item compendium*

I also got this book from amazon today.

Among the weapon abilities they have synergy abilities.  Take for example the following;

Say you have a +1 ghost touch weapon
You can then add ghost strike to the weapon for an additional +1 equivalent cost.  

Ghost strike lets you crit and sneak attack undead.

So you would have a +1 ghost touch ghost striking weapon equal to the cost of a +3 weapon.

They also have an appendix listing the items with costs listed, as well as a new random treasure table that has the MIC items and the DMG items on it.


----------



## DungeonmasterCal (Mar 13, 2007)

Hey everyone,

I know I said I'd post more on the MIC tonight, but I just got in and it's pretty late here.  I had some really important business of a very personal nature to attend, so hopefully the thread Merric offered can answer some more of your questions.  But IMO, this may have been one of the best D&D books I've bought in the last 6 months, maybe even the last year.


----------



## skippy_the_witch (Mar 13, 2007)

I have it also, so I will answer a few quick questions.  About psionics, there really aren't any NEW items.  Mostly what they did was collect a number of the items from the XPH and list them, BUT they also listed the ARCANE/DIVINE spells and feats needed to make them as normal magic items.  Thus, such fun items as boots of skating and psychoskins can now be made by regular magic-users, mot just psionicist.  Those that prefer to keep such items unique to psionics won't like this, others of us will find it useful (especially for my homebrew, where psionics is almost exclusively the purview of insectoids...and the technomagic using federation would have developed arcane items that would have mimicked the psionic ones...now I have the convertion stats I need).

Synergy qualities is also cool.  A Flaming burst quality is now only a +1, BUT it is a synergy quality and requires FLAMING as a prereq.  This way the burst feature is it's own rules, seperate from the flaming feature, which is really how it should be.

Lastly, I was one of those who HATED the "new" magic item format (pre MIC), but really do love this new format.  True, it takes up a bit more space than the DMG format, but no more than the new Spell Compendium did when compared to the PHB format.  No more having my eyes glaze over as I read boring pap fluff trying to find out how an item is activated and how many times it can be used per day.  Now all that is spelled out in easy to find and read format.  Worse problem I see is that the organization leaves a bit to be desired.  It is alphabetized, but if you don't know something is called "wind bracers" and instead think it is call "bracers of wind", you will spend forever looking for it under "b" rather than "w".

Let me know if there are any other questions I can answer.

skippy
GM of The Cursed Earth Campaign


----------



## MerricB (Mar 13, 2007)

What are the five things you like most in the MIC? 

Cheers!


----------



## skippy_the_witch (Mar 13, 2007)

I am a gadgeteer at heart, and always played that sort in most kinds of games.  Thus, while I am the GM in my current homebrew, and haven't had the chance to play in many years, my favorite regular party NPC is an artificer.  This said, number one favorite thing is augment crystals.  They are too cool.

Second, as already mentioned, the arcane version of traditionally psionic items.

Third, the new format.  Still a bit padded (ummm ok so desription of flaming feature is a weapon on fire...DUH), but not anything that really eats up the page count, and the listing is REALLY simple and self explanatory.

Fourth is the gathering of the various weapon and armor abilities not found in the DMG in one place.  Combine this with Bastion's Arms & Armor, and you are really good to go.

Fifth is the synergy abilities.  I have always thought that the burst capability should be it's own listing, seperate from the energy it is based on.  Now it is.  Plus, they add a few new synergy abilities to some of the old standard, like the already mentioned ghost touch.  All of this is especially useful in my homebrew, as I have technomagical devices that basically use a combination of perpetrated press's Arsenal and Factory, combined with Iron Kingdoms mechanika item creation rules.

It if says anything, I even paid FULL price for this book, which I almost never do, to get it last friday rather than wait a week or two and order it online.  That said, I still feel like I got my monies worth.

skippy
The GM of The Cursed Earth Campaign


----------



## Obergnom (Mar 13, 2007)

I have got it too, since last saturday. What I like most? It has got so many itmes (created new or changed from the original) that are worth their cost. (From a players perspective)

I was really unsure about that "cheaper items" ad blurb, but it is what they did, and it is great.... now you are able to fill all the item slots of your 6th level character with items worth up to 1000gp, and it is worth it! They are actually usefull, but never better than the big six, but as good as... IMO.

Oh, btw. I like the ney random treasure generation, the Idea of giving Items level, which can be used by the DM the same way ELs are used. (Same level means appropriate for your characters, a bit above might be okay, but don't go to far.)
There is a simple method using these level for equiping NPCs (And PCs, if you wish)

must got to work now... just wanted to say, I think it is the best book wizards did since... well, a long time. All of a sudden, magic items are no longer boring. Its like they reinvented 1/3 of character generation. (IMO there is classes, feats and equipment)


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 13, 2007)

Got my copy today. While I was expecting some different things, this is probably a decent magic item thingie.

But honestly I prefer Arms and Armor 3.5 by Bastion Press.


----------



## Felon (Mar 14, 2007)

Obergnom said:
			
		

> I was really unsure about that "cheaper items" ad blurb, but it is what they did, and it is great.... now you are able to fill all the item slots of your 6th level character with items worth up to 1000gp, and it is worth it! They are actually usefull, but never better than the big six, but as good as... IMO.




OK, many hours have passed and nobody else has asked within that span of time, so allow me to: what are some of these wonderfully economical little trinkets?


----------



## Dragonhelm (Mar 14, 2007)

So what's the basic gist of the Tigerskin Armor?


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 14, 2007)

Felon,

Define Trinkets...

Trampas/Dragonhelm,

Tigerskin armor is a +1 mithril shirt that grants +2 competence bonus to Hide, Jump and Move Silently checks. In addition, the armor has three other special abilities:
Once per day you can activate the armor to grant you a +4 enhancement bonus to Dex for 9 minutes.
Two times a day, you can activate the armor to gain the scent special quality for 5 rounds.
Three times a day you can gain claw attacks at 1d4 and extend your reach by 5 feet. The claws last for 5 rounds. Plus when you wild shape, you retain the abilities of the armor no matter the shape.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Mar 14, 2007)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Trampas/Dragonhelm,
> 
> Tigerskin armor is a +1 mithril shirt that grants +2 competence bonus to Hide, Jump and Move Silently checks. In addition, the armor has three other special abilities:
> Once per day you can activate the armor to grant you a +4 enhancement bonus to Dex for 9 minutes.
> ...




Fantastic!  Thanks so much, Nightfall!  

This set of armor would work so perfectly for an old character of mine.  Of course, the Garb of the Hunting Cat (as seen on the March Previews on WotC's site) also looks quite interesting.


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 14, 2007)

Trampas/Dragonhelm,

Np. If you mean the Set...eh. it's not bad. Honestly I felt like they could have done better in places. But overall it's pretty decent.

Did you want more info on that set?


----------



## Dragonhelm (Mar 14, 2007)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Trampas/Dragonhelm,
> 
> Np. If you mean the Set...eh. it's not bad. Honestly I felt like they could have done better in places. But overall it's pretty decent.
> 
> Did you want more info on that set?





If it isn't too much trouble.  I didn't know if there was anything beyond the blurb in the previews.


----------



## blargney the second (Mar 14, 2007)

Did they update the amulet of mighty fists?  It always struck me as a tad overpriced.


----------



## yipwyg42 (Mar 14, 2007)

Steadfast boots 1400 gold pieces

+4 vs bull rush, trip, overrun
also as long as you wield a two handed weapon, anytime you are charged you are considered to have a ready action which is set against charge.  This is true even if your weapon normally can't.


----------



## Obergnom (Mar 14, 2007)

Some more...

Armband of Elusive Action (800gp)
Lets you, once per day as an immediate action avoid provoking an AOO you would have otherwise provoked.

Acrobats Boots (900gp)
+2 Competence to Tumble
3 Charges, Swift Activate, +10 foot movement for 1 round with one charge. (2 charges 15ft, 3 -  20ft)

Brute Gauntlets (500gp)
swift activate, morale bonus to str checks, strenght skill checks and melee weapon damage. 3 charges per day. 1 charge +2 bonus, 2 charges +3 bonus, 3 charges +4 bonus.

I think these are good items for the lower levels (There are more of these). Selling them gives you just enough gold to get a potion, and they work every day.

Has anybody mentioned the Items by Slot by Price Tables in the back of the book? Those are great for equiping a character...


----------



## Stalker0 (Mar 14, 2007)

Obergnom said:
			
		

> Some more...
> 
> Armband of Elusive Action (800gp)
> Lets you, once per day as an immediate action avoid provoking an AOO you would have otherwise provoked.
> ...




As usual, everyone went into a panic with Andy's article, but I think this show some excellent design work. What makes a lot of items pointless isn't there price, its there action cost. These swift action items are very cool and decently priced.


----------



## Agamemnon (Mar 14, 2007)

I quite liked the 3 charges/day items with stackable effects depending on how many charges you expended. I also liked the fact the least augment crystals can be put on masterwork items, and that they don't require their target weapons to be especially forged to use them. It gives a neat alternative for the player's first magic weapon, allowing them to have something more interesting than a boring +1.

I'm not all the way through yet, but a lot of the images are truly amazing. Some of them are quite a long way away from the items they portray, but no matter. So far, my favorite are the pictures of _Foxhide armor_ and _Crystal Mask of Dread_.

I did notice a few faults/annoyances, too. Items with psionic powers as prerequisites alongside spells should also have psionic item creation feats listed alongside traditional ones. It's not a major problem, and anyone with a familiarity with psionics can easily "convert" the feats. I thought I also saw a few editing problems and typos, but nothing that affected the legibility of the overall.


----------



## D.Shaffer (Mar 14, 2007)

out of curiosity, since my copy hasnt shown up yet...

Any new/repriced incarnum items, or are the few there just unchanged reprints?


----------



## Xath (Mar 14, 2007)

I also got the MIC.  Overall, I think it's a fantastic book, but I'm not too enthused about the new treasure generation table.  

Mainly because it's crazy easy, takes a fraction of the time and limits the number of dice I get to roll.  I no longer get to roll up 30 art objects.  It's too...convenient.  

One of the tendancies of the book I've noticed is a large increase of lower priced items.  There are now (total) over 130 magical enhancements that can be placed on a weapon.  However, there is still only one +5 enhancement (vorpal).


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 14, 2007)

*agrees with Xath that it feels like they put a great deal of magical stuff at reduced prices*


----------



## ehren37 (Mar 14, 2007)

Xath said:
			
		

> Mainly because it's crazy easy, takes a fraction of the time and limits the number of dice I get to roll.  I no longer get to roll up 30 art objects.  It's too...convenient.




The treasure gen charts include gems, art objects and mundane items? Thats a plus!


----------



## bento (Mar 14, 2007)

I was looking at it this past weekend at Borders and the one thing that struck me about the book is that there is SO much information in it.

As I joked with another RPGer at the store, I wished the book came with a CTRL+F function to find what I was looking for more quickly!


----------



## Atavar (Mar 14, 2007)

*Glaring Error in MIC*

I really like the book, but I did find an error that really annoys me.

On p. 5 the MIC says that each +1 enhancement bonus to armor and shields adds 2 to the hardness and 10 to the h.p. of the item.

On p. 27 it says that each +1 enhancement bonus to a weapon adds 1 to the hardness and 1 to the h.p. of the item.

However, on p. 225 it says that each +1 enhancement bonus adds 2 to the hardness and 10 to the h.p. for armor, shields, AND weapons.

That's a glaring contradiction.  The same contradiction is in the core rules (PHB v. DMG) as well.  I would've hoped they'd have corrected that contradiction in this book.

Grrr.

I still really like the book, though.

Later,

Atavar

P.S. FYI, according to the DMG errata and the FAQ, p. 225 of the MIC is correct.

Thanks,

A.


----------



## RichGreen (Mar 14, 2007)

Hi,

This book just sounds better and better! Not meant to be coming out in the UK this week though.   

Cheers


Richard


----------



## Mercule (Mar 14, 2007)

bento said:
			
		

> As I joked with another RPGer at the store, I wished the book came with a CTRL+F function to find what I was looking for more quickly!




Hmm... The Compendium series might actually be a better buy as PDF.  That's a very odd thought coming from me.


----------



## Eytan Bernstein (Mar 14, 2007)

Because I'm not in the US, I can't pick up my designer complimentary hard copies, but I have been very thankful that I have a PDF copy that allows searching .


----------



## Xath (Mar 15, 2007)

Hrm.  I found another rules contradiction (update?).  In the DMG, when you add a secondary effect to an existing magical item (such as adding the Boots of Speed qualities to existing Boots of Striding and Springing), the added effect costs 1.5 times the normal price.  (18000 instead of 12000).  

However, in the Magic Item Compendium, it states that there is no additional charge for adding secondary effects.

Secondly, in the DMG, you can change the item slot placement of a wondrous item to something that doesn't follow the body slot affinity by paying an additional 50%.  The MIC has no such caveat (although the new affinity chart is much more specific) and says that items should only be placed in non-attuned slots at the DM's discretion.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 15, 2007)

Xath said:
			
		

> Hrm.  I found another rules contradiction (update?).  In the DMG, when you add a secondary effect to an existing magical item (such as adding the Boots of Speed qualities to existing Boots of Striding and Springing), the added effect costs 1.5 times the normal price.  (18000 instead of 12000).
> 
> However, in the Magic Item Compendium, it states that there is no additional charge for adding secondary effects.




Update.

Cheers!


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 15, 2007)

It's says 1.5 times on page 233. second full paragraph on the right.


----------



## VictorC (Mar 15, 2007)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> It's says 1.5 times on page 233. second full paragraph on the right.





Yeah, it sure does.


----------



## Xath (Mar 15, 2007)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> It's says 1.5 times on page 233. second full paragraph on the right.




Huh.  So is it then saying that as long as the effect you're adding falls under the "common item effect" category, there is no 1.5 multiplier?


----------



## Jarrod (Mar 15, 2007)

No copy here. Silly Wizards and their "20th for FLGS stores" release date. 

In any case, I believe the answer is yes. They want to encourage avoidance of the "big six", and so allowing you to tack on (say) +5 resistance to a Cloak of Elvenkind means you can get both. In effect, they're subsidizing off-center items. 

Neat!


----------



## Mistwell (Mar 15, 2007)

Add my voice to the folks saying this is a great new book.  I really appreciate the organizational efforts they put into this book.  How the items are set out, with clear headings, and the new format for each item spelling out how it is activated and it's level and what kind of action to activate etc... is really helpful.  The index is well done as well.  And I agree that the low priced, low powered items are really nice.  I mean, there SHOULD be an item to increase just reflex saves (or just will or fort) by +1 without paying for an item that increases ALL your saves by +1 !


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 15, 2007)

Xath said:
			
		

> Huh.  So is it then saying that as long as the effect you're adding falls under the "common item effect" category, there is no 1.5 multiplier?




I believe so. Increasing an item (like making a +1 sword +2) has no extra cost, adding a Common ability has no extra cost. Adding another item increases the cost by 50%.


----------



## Mistwell (Mar 16, 2007)

So for example if I have boots that increase my speed by +10, it doesn't cost more than x 1 to add the ability to move normally over rough terrain to that item, but it would cost x 1.5 to add the ability to have +1 to all saves (which is not a similar ability to the base ability)?


----------



## Dross (Mar 16, 2007)

Not having the chance to look at the book, can somebody answer this Q:

What non-combat/non-skill bossting magical items are there.

One of my all time favourite magical items is the Magic of Faerun's Travel cloak ( temp protection, keeps you dry, provides rations, water and WARM TEA) becoming an iconic part of a PC. 

I'm hoping that there are similar items there.


----------



## gribble (Mar 16, 2007)

Could you please post some more details on the Circlet of Mages?

Sounds like a keeper...


----------



## JustKim (Mar 16, 2007)

The circlet of mages is 5K. It provides +2 to concentration all the time and has 3 charges per day. Using a charge when you cast a spell allows you to retain the spell as though you hadn't cast it- the number of charges used is proportional to the level of the spell.

It is a free action, not a swift action, to activate the circlet, which is significant as swift actions become more prevalent.


----------



## gribble (Mar 16, 2007)

Thanks! 

One last question - are there any spell pre-requisites to create? Or just the ability to cast 3rd level spells like pearls of power/momento magica?


----------



## Vanye (Mar 16, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> Did they update the amulet of mighty fists?  It always struck me as a tad overpriced.





I just got my copy last night (From bn.com; I've seen it at my FLGS, but I had a coupon for bn) but I am not seeing it.  

As far as I can see, no actual items from the DMG were included, but I haven't actually gone through the book(s) comparing them...


----------



## Vanye (Mar 16, 2007)

*Oddity...*

For some reason, the Disarming ability is a +2 bonus; you get a +2 bonus on disarm atempts, and you can't be disarmed.  Seems a little weak for a +2 bonus...


----------



## Vanye (Mar 16, 2007)

gribble said:
			
		

> Thanks!
> 
> One last question - are there any spell pre-requisites to create? Or just the ability to cast 3rd level spells like pearls of power/momento magica?




Mnemonic Enhancer.


----------



## Shade (Mar 16, 2007)

Does the screaming property (and screaming burst) deal the same amount of additional energy damage as the flaming/frost/shocking/corrosive properties (and their respective bursts)?   In some supplements, the sonic-dealing enhancements did the same, while in others, they did less.    Thanks!


----------



## hong (Mar 16, 2007)

Shade said:
			
		

> Does the screaming property (and screaming burst) deal the same amount of additional energy damage as the flaming/frost/shocking/corrosive properties (and their respective bursts)?   In some supplements, the sonic-dealing enhancements did the same, while in others, they did less.    Thanks!



 1d4/1d8 instead of 1d6/1d0, someone said.


----------



## Shade (Mar 16, 2007)

hong said:
			
		

> 1d4/1d8 instead of 1d6/1d0, someone said.




OK, thanks!


----------



## hong (Mar 16, 2007)

Actually, I was trolling.

. . .

Or... WAS I?

HAW HAW!


----------



## Vanye (Mar 16, 2007)

Shade said:
			
		

> OK, thanks!




FYI, that is correct; screaming is 1d4; burst is 1d8/2d8/3d8 (x2,x3,x4)


----------



## Evilhalfling (Mar 17, 2007)

Bother 
so my FLGS says that the book was shipped late, and will arrive next week, while the big chains got it first. 
The Other LGS just said they would have it next week, but provided no further info. 
Not enough for me to rethink my only buy gaming books from gaming stores poilcy, but still annoying.


----------



## Bayushi Seikuro (Mar 17, 2007)

I enjoy it so far.

It feels packed with info, obviously.  First time I've seen the new magic item layouts - they feel like spell layouts to me all in all.

Augment crystals are cool, as are the set items.

I like the new way you use the charts for experienced characters; instead of X gp value, you get so many items of each level.  If you're level 5, I think it's 2 lvl 5 items, and doubles each lower level.


----------



## hbarsquared (Mar 17, 2007)

Bayushi Seikuro said:
			
		

> If you're level 5, I think it's 2 lvl 5 items, and doubles each lower level.



Not quite doubles.

A straight 2 level-equivalent items per level.

So, 5th-level character:  5, 5, 4, 4, 3, 3, 2, 2, 1, 1

As well as guidelines for replacing multiple lower level items with a single higher level item and replacing a higher level item with multiple lower level items.


----------



## Felon (Mar 17, 2007)

It's missing some stuff I was looking for

Anyone remmber a ranged weapon property called "Exit Wound" from the Complete Warrior? It basically allowed you to shoot through one target into another. I was disappointed to see they didn't carry that over, and then looking in CW, I see others that go left out too. So, the MIC is by no means as complete as I'd hoped.


----------



## blargney the second (Mar 17, 2007)

I've ordered the book from Amazon as a result of this thread. *eagerly awaits*


----------



## Samurai (Mar 18, 2007)

About what percentage of the book would you say is entirely new, not reprinted from another source?  And same question for the Spell Compendium.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Mar 18, 2007)

Samurai said:
			
		

> About what percentage of the book would you say is entirely new, not reprinted from another source?  And same question for the Spell Compendium.



Spell Compendium is more than 90 percent reprints, although the campaign setting-specific names have all been dropped, so a fair number have slightly different names.


----------



## JustKim (Mar 18, 2007)

I haven't paid really close attention to magic items from splatbooks, so I may be wrong, but it seems to me at least half of the items in the book are new. Those that aren't new have been repriced (in the case of some very attractive DMG2 items, increased).


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Mar 18, 2007)

I'm interested in some items from the Miniatures Handbook. Did the _belt of magnificence_ show up?

_Armbands of might_?

_Belt of one mighty blow_?

_Gloves of fortunate striking_?


Did any of them change?


----------



## JustKim (Mar 18, 2007)

Belt: No, or not under that name.
Armbands: Yes, unchanged.
The other belt: Yes, unchanged except the 24 hour clause has been omitted (probably for space).
Gloves: Yes, unchanged except that the 24 hour clause has been omitted and the description has been shortened.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Mar 18, 2007)

Whew!

That means my Living Greyhawk characters won't have to come up with extra gp to keep their cherished items. Thanks!


----------



## MerricB (Mar 18, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> Spell Compendium is more than 90 percent reprints, although the campaign setting-specific names have all been dropped, so a fair number have slightly different names.




SC is 100% reprints.

MIC is... err.. 500 new items in 1250 items, IIRC.

Cheers!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Mar 18, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> SC is 100% reprints.



Aren't the new single-form polymorph spells new in SC?


----------



## Campbell (Mar 18, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> Aren't the new single-form polymorph spells new in SC?




The single-form spells first appeared in the Player's Handbook II. However, there were a few shapechange lite style spells, that were limited to specific creature types, in the Spell Compendium.


----------



## ohGr (Mar 18, 2007)

Did the _vest of legends_ (from DMG II) show up, and has it changed any?  It gave +5 Diplomacy and Perform and increased bard level by 5 for numerous bardic music effects for 16K.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Mar 18, 2007)

Just grabbed mine at a Barnes and Noble, thanks to a member discount email I got it quite cheap. Around $25.

There are some errors, I hope this doesn't turn out to be piled thick with them like some of the MM books, as reviewed by John Cooper. Just at a flipping through, I noticed...

Shields were left off the Adamantine price table, again.
As noted above, weapon hardness and hit points.
_Eyes of the eagle_, in the table on MIC page 247, are said to bestow a +5 to Search.

The summary of cold iron is off. Ordinarily cold iron is x2 weapon cost plus masterwork price, per DMG, while magic enhancement add +2000. Except the summary table in MIC says magic enhancements multiply cost by 2, on top of a base +2000 gp cost. Unless the MIC changed it... or did I miss errata somewhere and I have it wrong and the MIC has it right?


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Mar 18, 2007)

ohGr said:
			
		

> Did the _vest of legends_ (from DMG II) show up, and has it changed any?  It gave +5 Diplomacy and Perform and increased bard level by 5 for numerous bardic music effects for 16K.



Don't see it. Still getting used to the layout... I might have missed it.


----------



## Bayushi Seikuro (Mar 18, 2007)

Yes, Belt of One Mighty Blow is in the book (p74)

Yes, the layout takes some getting used to for sure.

And to whoever clarified my comment re: the number of items you start with.  I knew doubling didn't sound right.  

Magic weapons are at level 6, magic armor is at level 4.  Also, one thing I thought was cool was that used wands were addressed in here; a wand with 10 charges of magic missile, for example, is level 1.


----------



## Knight Otu (Mar 18, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> Aren't the new single-form polymorph spells new in SC?



Originally from Dragon Magazine, IIRC.

Out of curiosity, are there rules to prevent or discourage crafters from simply completing a set of magic items when they receive one item from the set?


----------



## freyar (Mar 18, 2007)

So, I've only glanced through this at a bookstore and not got it yet.  I couldn't tell on a brief look-over: Is there any overlap with the DMG magic items or do they only appear in the treasure generation tables?


----------



## MerricB (Mar 18, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> Aren't the new single-form polymorph spells new in SC?




No. They turned up in Dragon Magazine. It's a miniatures-related article, which is why I remember it. All the polymorph spells in SC turn you into an existing miniatures from the first 4 sets.

Cheers!


----------



## dagger (Mar 19, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> No. They turned up in Dragon Magazine. It's a miniatures-related article, which is why I remember it. All the polymorph spells in SC turn you into an existing miniatures from the first 4 sets.
> 
> Cheers!




There is one in PHB II


----------



## Bayushi Seikuro (Mar 19, 2007)

I didn't see any rules about NOT crafting the rest of the set once you have a piece; in fact, they talk about how to make the remaining pieces.

I plan on making people either go after the other pieces if they want them, or else, the set benefits will be drastically lower; I mean, part of the effect from sets - although it might be more from Diablo flavor-text - is that the powers 'rubbed off' from being used by great heroes and villains.


----------



## James McMurray (Mar 19, 2007)

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, are there rules to prevent or discourage crafters from simply completing a set of magic items when they receive one item from the set?




The Lore section for set items gives a DC for knowing about them. I'd assume you'd have to learn a bit before you could make the remaining pieces. If like many groups you grant instant knowledge of all items, their creation prereqs, and powers when someone learns the craft feat, the lore limitation may not work.


----------



## Master of the Game (Mar 19, 2007)

My FLGS doesn't have it yet.  I gave up and ordered it from Amazon.  It got sent out the next day, and should be here tomorrow or the next day.


----------



## James McMurray (Mar 19, 2007)

I went to my FLGS and he said it wasn't being released until Tuesday and he'd have them Friday. I went to Waldenbooks and they had 4 copies out.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 19, 2007)

dagger said:
			
		

> There is one in PHB II




IIRC, PHB2 is post-SC. The source of the SC spells is the Dragon article.

Cheers!


----------



## JustKim (Mar 19, 2007)

Bayushi Seikuro said:
			
		

> I didn't see any rules about NOT crafting the rest of the set once you have a piece; in fact, they talk about how to make the remaining pieces.
> 
> I plan on making people either go after the other pieces if they want them, or else, the set benefits will be drastically lower; I mean, part of the effect from sets - although it might be more from Diablo flavor-text - is that the powers 'rubbed off' from being used by great heroes and villains.



Remember 2E and the paladin who sidetrekked the entire group with his heroic quests for a holy mount and sword? Granted, probably not if you were the one playing the paladin.

Now imagine that everyone in the group wants a set. At least one, given that some of them are too low-powered to be useful for very long. You are talking about dozens of item quests. If the PCs want to be heroic or do something meaningful, it's going to have to happen in the course of an item quest- and gee, how convenient that the evil ogre was using a veil of storms as a handkerchief!

Personally, I don't want to dedicate a campaign to collecting items that work a little better together, so I'm going to let people get ahold of them without a dedicated quest.


----------



## ohGr (Mar 19, 2007)

Eric Anondson said:
			
		

> Don't see it. Still getting used to the layout... I might have missed it.



Good to know.  Thanks.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 19, 2007)

JustKim said:
			
		

> Now imagine that everyone in the group wants a set. At least one, given that some of them are too low-powered to be useful for very long.




One of the things that was repeated in MIC was the idea of simply adding on to items as you gain in power, rather than replacing them. In addition, several of the items mention that they were originally spread by folks getting a piece and making the rest.

So yeah, I think the designers were trying to avoid the Quest for Items idea. Heck, the Sets aren't so much artifacts as just items with a synergy bonus. You can also see it in other items throughour the book which add something if used with another item. (Such as "if you're also using a wisdom boosting item, the modifier adds to the blah blah".)


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Mar 19, 2007)

Evilhalfling said:
			
		

> Bother
> so my FLGS says that the book was shipped late, and will arrive next week, while the big chains got it first.
> The Other LGS just said they would have it next week, but provided no further info.
> Not enough for me to rethink my only buy gaming books from gaming stores poilcy, but still annoying.




As a FLGS store owner, as well as a huge gaming geek, I sympathize doubly so.  I'll be getting my copies in today (though I can't sell them until tomorrow), whereas people that purchased through, say, Amazon.com got theirs a week ago.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 19, 2007)

Nightchilde-2 said:
			
		

> As a FLGS store owner, as well as a huge gaming geek, I sympathize doubly so.  I'll be getting my copies in today (though I can't sell them until tomorrow), whereas people that purchased through, say, Amazon.com got theirs a week ago.




I'm not sure why the book trade believes the street date is the 13th and the Hobby trade thinks it's the 20th. It used to be the opposite (hobby stores got books middle of the month, book trade end of the month) and I doubt this is an intentional thing.


----------



## Seeten (Mar 19, 2007)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Trampas/Dragonhelm,
> 
> Np. If you mean the Set...eh. it's not bad. Honestly I felt like they could have done better in places. But overall it's pretty decent.
> 
> Did you want more info on that set?




Get on IRC I have questions for you that cannot wait. =P


----------



## Mistwell (Mar 21, 2007)

Samurai said:
			
		

> About what percentage of the book would you say is entirely new, not reprinted from another source?  And same question for the Spell Compendium.




Having spent the weekend reading about half the Magic Item Compendium, it sure seems like a huge amount is new.


----------



## Master of the Game (Mar 21, 2007)

Master of the Game said:
			
		

> My FLGS doesn't have it yet.  I gave up and ordered it from Amazon.  It got sent out the next day, and should be here tomorrow or the next day.



I got mine yesterday... only one day after my FLGS started stocking them.

Sucks really, I'm an FLGS kinda guy, but terribly impatient.  If I had known that they would have them so quickly I probably would have just waited, but I have had bad experiences where, when something didn't come in on time, it didn't come in within weeks of the street date.

Even WotC stuff.  *shrug*  Usually it's a good store, but sometimes...


----------



## johnnype (Mar 21, 2007)

Nice book but I think they should have given some space to special materials. It'd been nice if they had included, say, glassteel and all the other materials spread over the various books. Eberron has a bunch of interesting materials that non-users of the setting might have found useful. 

Great book though.


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Mar 21, 2007)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> I'm not sure why the book trade believes the street date is the 13th and the Hobby trade thinks it's the 20th. It used to be the opposite (hobby stores got books middle of the month, book trade end of the month) and I doubt this is an intentional thing.




I don't know either, but my distributor wouldn't send it to me until the day before the street date they had (Mar 20th), despite the fact that I quibbled with them about people already having it from Amazon.  

It looks like it's pretty much a WotC thing though, as I can get, say, White Wolf stuff with the same street date as is listed for the "big guys."

It is an awesome book though.  Seriously.


----------



## Felon (Mar 21, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> Spell Compendium is more than 90 percent reprints, although the campaign setting-specific names have all been dropped, so a fair number have slightly different names.




Although the spells are 100% reprints, many spells appearing there were revised. _Close wounds_ and _clutch of Orcus _spring to mind readily.


----------



## Felon (Mar 21, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> MIC is... err.. 500 new items in 1250 items, IIRC.




Somewhat vexing that so many new items were included while so much other material was selectively left out. I was hoping they'd try to be as inclusive as possible, which is after all the point of a compendium.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 21, 2007)

Nightchilde-2 said:
			
		

> I don't know either, but my distributor wouldn't send it to me until the day before the street date they had (Mar 20th), despite the fact that I quibbled with them about people already having it from Amazon.
> 
> It looks like it's pretty much a WotC thing though, as I can get, say, White Wolf stuff with the same street date as is listed for the "big guys."
> 
> It is an awesome book though.  Seriously.




I think it was just this book though, since I haven't heard of this problem previously. It wasn't just Amazon though, my local borders is 4 minutes from home, the LGS is 45 minutes. I get a coupon for borders (20-30% off) vs retail at LGS. Borders had it a week earlier...


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 21, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Somewhat vexing that so many new items were included while so much other material was selectively left out. I was hoping they'd try to be as inclusive as possible, which is after all the point of a compendium.




I wanted a grouping of all magic items, DMG as well as supplements. Figured they'd rework some of the stuff. Give me just one book to consult when equipping a PC.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Mar 22, 2007)

Bayushi Seikuro said:
			
		

> I didn't see any rules about NOT crafting the rest of the set once you have a piece; in fact, they talk about how to make the remaining pieces.
> 
> I plan on making people either go after the other pieces if they want them, or else, the set benefits will be drastically lower; I mean, part of the effect from sets - although it might be more from Diablo flavor-text - is that the powers 'rubbed off' from being used by great heroes and villains.




Really, the set benefits aren't terribly great, in my opinion, with one or two exceptions.  I don't see a point to not allowing people to complete them.

Brad


----------



## MerricB (Mar 22, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Somewhat vexing that so many new items were included while so much other material was selectively left out. I was hoping they'd try to be as inclusive as possible, which is after all the point of a compendium.




I'm quite happy that they didn't up the price to include material I wouldn't use.

Cheers!


----------



## Kafkonia (Mar 22, 2007)

I just got mine today, and one thing that stands out is that the _maiming_ property is completely different from the similarly-named property from the Miniatures Handbook.

MIC -- extra damage on a critical
MH -- random critical modifier

I prefer the MH version.


----------



## Felon (Mar 22, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I'm quite happy that they didn't up the price to include material I wouldn't use.



Please elaborate on this peculiar response. How exactly do you know that everything they cut was material you wouldn't use? Then we can go into the implicit notion that all the new items they included instead was stuff you have greater use for.


----------



## johnnype (Mar 22, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Somewhat vexing that so many new items were included while so much other material was selectively left out. I was hoping they'd try to be as inclusive as possible, which is after all the point of a compendium.



you might want to read the articles WotC has on their website about how they put the book together. Bottom line is that many, if not most, of the magic items that have appeared before the MIC sucked ass so they dropped them completely.


----------



## Arnwyn (Mar 22, 2007)

There's a fascinating assumption with the item levels that I'm surprised no one has mentioned yet:

The MIC assumes that no one item a character has will be worth more than 1/8 of the character's wealth for a particular level, and recommends against going much higher for the most part. (I know, for example, there are some ENWorlders that use 1/2...) Interesting.


----------



## Victim (Mar 22, 2007)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> There's a fascinating assumption with the item levels that I'm surprised no one has mentioned yet:
> 
> The MIC assumes that no one item a character has will be worth more than 1/8 of the character's wealth for a particular level, and recommends against going much higher for the most part. (I know, for example, there are some ENWorlders that use 1/2...) Interesting.




Well yeah.  Multiple small items are usually far more effective than a few big ones.  If you shell out for the more expensive items, it's usually only going to be more problematic for _you_, with a few exceptions - like a ring of blinking for rogues, since it enables their other abilities.  All of the pretty effective, cheap items for every slot creates additional incentives to spread the money out.


----------



## blargney the second (Mar 22, 2007)

Victim said:
			
		

> like a ring of blinking for rogues



For just a second, I thought it said a bling of rinking.


----------



## SteveC (Mar 22, 2007)

I just wanted to take a miniute to give kudos to WotC for this book. It is absolutely full of great ideas, from the magic item sets, to crystals and rune staves. The thing that I like the most, however, is the magic item levels rules, which do something that I've been hoping to see for a very long time: make the process of statting up high level characters (either PCs or NPCs) a lot easier.

This year I've picked up two WotC books, this one and *Dungeonscape*, and both have been excellent. I hope that there's something to be learned from this and we see more books at this level of creativity and content. This book really gets a "bravo" from me, which is something I haven't been able to really say all that often in the last year.

Good stuff all around!

--Steve


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Mar 22, 2007)

Kafkonia said:
			
		

> I just got mine today, and one thing that stands out is that the _maiming_ property is completely different from the similarly-named property from the Miniatures Handbook.
> 
> MIC -- extra damage on a critical
> MH -- random critical modifier
> ...




I always found that a smidge overpowered for a +1 effect.  Maybe it's just me, but having a 50% chance of getting one or two extra attacks' worth of damage on a longsword hit seems like it should be more than a +1.  (Edit)  Even with the 25% chance of rolling a one, and just dealing regular weapon damage, that's still not enough of a downside.

I mean, heck, our powergamer DM used it on everything when he was playing.

Brad


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Mar 23, 2007)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> I think it was just this book though, since I haven't heard of this problem previously. It wasn't just Amazon though, my local borders is 4 minutes from home, the LGS is 45 minutes. I get a coupon for borders (20-30% off) vs retail at LGS. Borders had it a week earlier...




I'd seen it at Books A Million down near Charlotte at about the same time mine was being shipped from Amazon. I thumbed thru their copy and then thru mine when it showed up.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Mar 23, 2007)

Got this a couple of days ago -- pretty cool.  Lots of great items.

I especially like the random treasure tables at the back.  They are really user friendly.


----------



## 3catcircus (Mar 23, 2007)

*Two Questions...*

Did they provide clarification/guidance/updated rules for magic item creation so things are less nebulous?

Did they make magic items better than they should be (i.e. errata'ed something to give better benefits than before, or give the same benefits for a lesser price than before)?


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 23, 2007)

3,

Well I can honestly say with regards to the relics from Complete Divine, they dropped the prices down considerably.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Mar 23, 2007)

3catcircus said:
			
		

> Did they make magic items better than they should be (i.e. errata'ed something to give better benefits than before, or give the same benefits for a lesser price than before)?



Mostly it seems like they powered something down and made it significantly cheaper. Many devices and items were altered into something like, usable 3 times per day but a swift action to activate. Read the Design Notebook articles on WotC's site to understand the philosophy behind the choices.

I guess the design choices came down to comparing an item with a selection of no-brainer items that every PCs seems to insist on. Comparing on price point and comparing on using the same body slot.


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 23, 2007)

This is why I felt the stuff in Advanced Game Master's guide was better, for magic items anyway. The soverign materials, levin, etc, was pretty good at being good for DMs AND good for players.


----------



## Edheldur (Mar 23, 2007)

3catcircus said:
			
		

> Did they provide clarification/guidance/updated rules for magic item creation so things are less nebulous?



Follow up question: Were the pricing guidelines for the "big six" changed at all? (I recall reading somewhere that it's now cheaper to add the big six enhancements to existing magic items than it was before).


----------



## Arnwyn (Mar 23, 2007)

Victim said:
			
		

> Well yeah.  Multiple small items are usually far more effective than a few big ones.  If you shell out for the more expensive items, it's usually only going to be more problematic for _you_, with a few exceptions - like a ring of blinking for rogues, since it enables their other abilities.  All of the pretty effective, cheap items for every slot creates additional incentives to spread the money out.



There is no "well yeah", on ENWorld at least. I have yet to see anyone even suggest that no character should have an item worth more than about 1/8 of a character's total wealth at a particular level (which is exactly what the MIC is saying).

I wonder how many people here think that no character lower than about 9th-11th (11th specifically, 9th as a "small exception") should have a +2 weapon...


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 23, 2007)

3catcircus said:
			
		

> Did they provide clarification/guidance/updated rules for magic item creation so things are less nebulous?




They went into adding effects, but really they didn't discuss crafting magical items much at all.


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 23, 2007)

Arn,

It depends on the campaign setting if you ask me. In FR, I think between 7th and 9th works, GH maybe there but dunno until I actually GET there in say Age of Worms. Scarred Lands, no way. Potions and oils maybe, but not actual +2 unless they are SPECIFICALLY relics, have a great back story and/or are legacy items/weapons.


----------



## Ulric (Mar 23, 2007)

SteveC said:
			
		

> I just wanted to take a miniute to give kudos to WotC for this book. It is absolutely full of great ideas, from the magic item sets, to crystals and rune staves.




+1

I just got my copy. I'm likin' it a lot.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Mar 23, 2007)

Edheldur said:
			
		

> Follow up question: Were the pricing guidelines for the "big six" changed at all? (I recall reading somewhere that it's now cheaper to add the big six enhancements to existing magic items than it was before).



Well, the big six are primarily items from the _DMG_. The "bix six" items are these:

-Magic weapon
-Magic armor & shield
-Ring of protection
-Cloak of resistance
-Amulet of natural armor
-Ability-score boosters​
These are what items were measured against. The pricing on everything from the DMG was left unchanged. In fact, as far as I can tell--in spite of major candidates for redesign, like the _chaos diamond_--*nothing* from the DMG is listed in the book (except in the random item table at the end.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Mar 23, 2007)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> There is no "well yeah", on ENWorld at least. I have yet to see anyone even suggest that no character should have an item worth more than about 1/8 of a character's total wealth at a particular level (which is exactly what the MIC is saying).



I have a character in Living Greyhawk who definately has an item worth far more than 1/8 his wealth. A 15th level character bought a _belt of magnificence +4_. Oh dear, I sold nearly everything I had except armor and my shield to get it. 100,000gp for a +4 stat bump in all abilities, and only taking up a single body slot. The character has some amount of dependency on 5 of his 6 stats, Str (damage, attack, and various shield feat DCs), Dex (AC and Init), Con (hit points), Wis (bonus spells), Cha (smite and divine grace).

Yeah, that's an item worth more than 1/8 his wealth and I'm happy to pay it.

Hmm, I wonder if the 1/8 guideline actually means 1/8 excluding weapons and armor and shield...


----------



## VirgilCaine (Mar 23, 2007)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> There is no "well yeah", on ENWorld at least. I have yet to see anyone even suggest that no character should have an item worth more than about 1/8 of a character's total wealth at a particular level (which is exactly what the MIC is saying).
> 
> I wonder how many people here think that no character lower than about 9th-11th (11th specifically, 9th as a "small exception") should have a +2 weapon...




Personally, a RESTRICTION like that is distasteful to me. More, smaller items being more effective, well, that's up to the PCs to decide. I go with 1/2 wealth.


----------



## borble (Mar 23, 2007)

hey, 
are the weapon enchantments from dragon mag. described in this book? 

ben


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Mar 23, 2007)

borble said:
			
		

> are the weapon enchantments from dragon mag. described in this book?



Which issue(s)?


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 23, 2007)

Yeah I was going to ask the same thing (IE which issues). I think they didn't add them if they did, cause of Dragon Compendium.

Then again I could be wrong...


----------



## Farcaster (Mar 23, 2007)

Aside from some changes to some age-old items like the beloved "Ring of Nine Lives," I'm still loving this book! I definitely recommend it.  Although, I do wish they had revamped magic item creation rules and costs a little, and I would have liked if the original weapon and armor attributes would have been included as well.


----------



## Kafkonia (Mar 23, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> I always found that a smidge overpowered for a +1 effect.  Maybe it's just me, but having a 50% chance of getting one or two extra attacks' worth of damage on a longsword hit seems like it should be more than a +1.  (Edit)  Even with the 25% chance of rolling a one, and just dealing regular weapon damage, that's still not enough of a downside.
> 
> I mean, heck, our powergamer DM used it on everything when he was playing.
> 
> Brad




Hmm. I can see where you're coming from. But I think it would be underpowered at +2, compared to the burst enchantments where you're guaranteed an extra nd10 damage on a critical hit.

And the higher the critical multiplier, the greater the chance of getting less than normal crit damage -- a x2 requires a 1d4 roll (25%), but x3 requires 1d6 (33%) and the rare x4 requires a d8 (37.5%.)

I wouldn't make it available at your everyday weapon's shop, but I think it's wonderfully flavourful for the right sort of person. It may show up in the armoury of certain chance- or chaos-themed NPCs...


----------



## sjmiller (Mar 23, 2007)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> There is no "well yeah", on ENWorld at least. I have yet to see anyone even suggest that no character should have an item worth more than about 1/8 of a character's total wealth at a particular level (which is exactly what the MIC is saying).



Umm, being that I just got the book the other day, I haven't had a chance to really delve into it.  I am curious though, where do you read this assumption in MIC?  I can't say that I have found anything that suggests this.


----------



## Kerrick (Mar 23, 2007)

> There is no "well yeah", on ENWorld at least. I have yet to see anyone even suggest that no character should have an item worth more than about 1/8 of a character's total wealth at a particular level (which is exactly what the MIC is saying).
> 
> I wonder how many people here think that no character lower than about 9th-11th (11th specifically, 9th as a "small exception") should have a +2 weapon...



Yeah.. I looked at that and said, "What are they smoking?" I use 1/4 wealth for design paradigms, and it works out quite well.



> Umm, being that I just got the book the other day, I haven't had a chance to really delve into it. I am curious though, where do you read this assumption in MIC? I can't say that I have found anything that suggests this.



It doesn't state it right out -you have to do a little math, but it's in the back of the book, where they explain the "item levels" system.


----------



## dagger (Mar 23, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> Yeah.. I looked at that and said, "What are they smoking?" I use 1/4 wealth for design paradigms, and it works out quite well.





So you make sure no single item on the character is worth more than 25% of the total wealth? I have never really looked at the treasure of the players that way, maybe I should see how the wealth is distributed. Have you used this method up into high levels?


----------



## Kerrick (Mar 23, 2007)

> So you make sure no single item on the character is worth more than 25% of the total wealth? I have never really looked at the treasure of the players that way, maybe I should see how the wealth is distributed. Have you used this method up into high levels?




Yup - I use it at all levels. After 40th, though, you can pretty well toss wealth out the window and just adjudicate on a case by case basis, since the concept of "wealth" at that level is nigh meaningless - the PCs can get their hands on just about anything they want or need, short of unique items or artifacts, with only a little work and a minimal impact on their savings.



> Hmm, I wonder if the 1/8 guideline actually means 1/8 excluding weapons and armor and shield...



Considering they have weapons and armor listed on the item levels table, I'd say no. And... has anyone else noticed that you wouldn't have a +6 weapon under that system until 41st level?


----------



## Arnwyn (Mar 23, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> Yeah.. I looked at that and said, "What are they smoking?" I use 1/4 wealth for design paradigms, and it works out quite well.
> 
> 
> It doesn't state it right out -you have to do a little math, but it's in the back of the book, where they explain the "item levels" system.



Yup, exactly so. What *Kerrick* said.

I really like the idea of an item level, but somehow WotC even managed to screw that up - but the concept is there, and can be tweaked (not sure if I want to spend the time to bother). *sigh*

Though, just off the top of my head, maybe subtracting 3 or so from the item level might make it more workable (closer to 1/4 wealth, like Kerrick - and myself, incidentally - use) up to level 15, and then ignore the rest at higher levels (where there are fewer super-expensive items, anyways).

I wonder if the mechanisms behind the item level assumption is something WotC really does use in all their design work? (IIRC, while they've given the wealth system, have they ever explicitly said somewhere what the maximum gp value an item should be compared to their character wealth? You'd think since they included such a guideline they'd have gone into a tad bit more detail.) Anyone know? Because the difference between one's best item being 1/8 their level's wealth and 1/2 is quite significant.


----------



## RichGreen (Mar 23, 2007)

Edheldur said:
			
		

> Follow up question: Were the pricing guidelines for the "big six" changed at all? (I recall reading somewhere that it's now cheaper to add the big six enhancements to existing magic items than it was before).




No, but there is a table showing how much it costs to add saving throw, ability score and other bonuses to other items. For example, you can add a Dex bonus to boots of striding and springing.

Cheers


Richard


----------



## Jhaelen (Mar 24, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> Yeah.. I looked at that and said, "What are they smoking?" I use 1/4 wealth for design paradigms, and it works out quite well.
> 
> 
> It doesn't state it right out -you have to do a little math, but it's in the back of the book, where they explain the "item levels" system.



If you are referring to the tables on page 227 - these are for npcs, so you have to compare it to npc wealth. Take level 7 for example: the most expensive items *are* set at 1/4 wealth!
The rules for pcs are on page 228 (there's no table since the rule's real easy).
Additionally the table on page 228 'Item level equivalencies' shows how to trade up two lower level items to get a single more expensive one.

Further, I think, getting a +2 weapon at level 9 is perfectly fine, especially since MIC introduced augment crystals for weapons. By applying one of these, you're getting your worth of what would normally be the equivalent of a +2 weapon a lot earlier.


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 24, 2007)

I'm making my next item legacy items.


----------



## Kerrick (Mar 24, 2007)

> If you are referring to the tables on page 227 - these are for npcs, so you have to compare it to npc wealth. Take level 7 for example: the most expensive items are set at 1/4 wealth!



Right, they're mainly designed for NPCs, and they do very well in that regard. _However,_ it states in the paragraphs above Table 6-3 (which is the item levels table):



> Coincidentally, an item's level also provides a useful guideline to the DM as to when such an item becomes appropriate for the PCs. In general, PCs should own items of their own level or lower.



All items in the book use this level system - that's how they came up with the levels. Therefore, all PCs are constrained by it, if the DM chooses to use it as a guideline.

It does, however, go on to say:



> Be warned that this system consciously trades precision for speed... it does [not] replicate what you could purchase with the "normal" system available. When making an important NPC, building a player character's equipment list for a long-term campaign, or designing a treasure hoard... consider using the normal rules in place of these.



So... what was the point of using item levels again? *scratches head*


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 25, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> So... what was the point of using item levels again? *scratches head*



Speed for random NPCs, rather than intricate types like master villains or PCs.

Whether it was worth the page-count dedicated to it, I can't say.


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 25, 2007)

I think there is no point to this book other than to confuse the hell out of us people that liked magic items the way they were. Or at least something like they were.


----------



## JustKim (Mar 25, 2007)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> I think there is no point to this book other than to confuse the hell out of us people that liked magic items the way they were. Or at least something like they were.



What way were they?


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 25, 2007)

The way they were when we were kids when wereing with swords was cooler than fist fighting.


----------



## was (Mar 25, 2007)

bought it..like it


----------



## Evilhalfling (Mar 25, 2007)

Its just lovely - 
tonight the players  found 
Acrobatic boots, 900gp
armor of improved agility. +4000gp
Gloves of the starry Sky 1,100gp

total gp value = 6000
total dollars = 34.95 
fun = priceless 

I can be value stingy, and fun generous 
One problem I had  is that the greater crystals are found long  before the +3 weapons
so I'm just discarding those. 
Only the starry gloves were given to the wrong PC, I don't think that Psionic points can power a spell slot item.


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 25, 2007)

Well whatever works for you mister Halfling. Me I like my stinginess with a side order of "You can do that with spells!"


----------



## Stalker0 (Mar 25, 2007)

In general, love the new books. There's a few items I scoff at, but in general I think the abilities are pretty good. I will say though, that many of this items would be overpowered if allowed as slotless items. The x2 cost does not make up for the mass variety of powerful abilities you could rack up.

Also, looking in the back, it seems that you can now add stat bumps to items with other powers AT COST!! I can have a belt of awesome whatever and add +6 str to it for only 36000 instead of the 54000 it would cost under current rules (x1.5 for merging items).

I'm guessing this is so players can have their big 6 items and still have other cool stuff too.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 25, 2007)

Got it.

If you have it, look up the _vest of the archmagi_ (page 145). Too cool. 

Cheers!


----------



## Agamemnon (Mar 25, 2007)

The more I read the forums, the less I like the book. When I first got the MIC, I quite enjoyed it, right now it feels like a colossal waste of money.

Thanks a bundle.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Mar 25, 2007)

I think it's brilliant, the best 3E book I've read outside the core rules. The items are extremely well costed, much more so than those in the DMG. Nothing is overpowered or underpowered. There's much coolness, especially the sets.

Players love magic items so it's important to get this part of the game right.


----------



## Blastin (Mar 25, 2007)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> I think it's brilliant, the best 3E book I've read outside the core rules. The items are extremely well costed, much more so than those in the DMG. Nothing is overpowered or underpowered. There's much coolness, especially the sets.
> 
> Players love magic items so it's important to get this part of the game right.




 Agreed.
    And they brought back on of my favorite 2nd Ed items: Rod of Force!.... Yeah for the D&D lightsaber


----------



## Shroomy (Mar 25, 2007)

My girlfriend bought this book for me yesterday.  I've skimmed it and I enjoy it immensely.  Tons of useful items with reasonable costs.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Mar 26, 2007)

Eric Anondson said:
			
		

> I have a character in Living Greyhawk who definately has an item worth far more than 1/8 his wealth. A 15th level character bought a _belt of magnificence +4_. Oh dear, I sold nearly everything I had except armor and my shield to get it. 100,000gp for a +4 stat bump in all abilities, and only taking up a single body slot. The character has some amount of dependency on 5 of his 6 stats, Str (damage, attack, and various shield feat DCs), Dex (AC and Init), Con (hit points), Wis (bonus spells), Cha (smite and divine grace).
> 
> Yeah, that's an item worth more than 1/8 his wealth and I'm happy to pay it.
> 
> Hmm, I wonder if the 1/8 guideline actually means 1/8 excluding weapons and armor and shield...




Where is this item to be found?


----------



## MerricB (Mar 26, 2007)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> Where is this item to be found?




Miniatures Handbook.

I gave all my PCs +6 Belts of Magnificence as a reward from Tenser before they took on Kyuss.

Cheers!


----------



## hong (Mar 26, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> So... what was the point of using item levels again? *scratches head*




Handing out items for NPC treasure, I think. So if you fight a 10th level NPC, you'll find a 10th level item as loot (plus other, less powerful stuff).

You could also use them as prereqs for item use: you have to be at least 10th level to activate a 10th level item's powers.


----------



## DaveMage (Mar 26, 2007)

Got it today.

Great book!


----------



## hong (Mar 26, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I gave all my PCs +6 Belts of Magnificence as a reward from Tenser before they took on Kyuss.




Ph33r Kyuss and his epic ax of wailing!


----------



## thundershot (Mar 26, 2007)

I got this book last week, and after days perusing it, I already want a MIC v2!!


----------



## just__al (Mar 26, 2007)

VirgilCaine said:
			
		

> Personally, a RESTRICTION like that is distasteful to me. More, smaller items being more effective, well, that's up to the PCs to decide. I go with 1/2 wealth.




When characters come in above 2nd level they can spend 40% on one item and no more than 20% on other items (but I'll let them reach if somehting rather useful is 41-45%)

Seems to have worked out well.  I don't want to see somebody come in with an intelligent greatsword and a loin cloth...


----------



## shilsen (Mar 26, 2007)

just__al said:
			
		

> Seems to have worked out well.  I don't want to see somebody come in with an intelligent greatsword and a loin cloth...




What about a greatsword and an intelligent loincloth? Or a greatsword _in_ an intelligent loincloth, IYKWIMAITYD? 

Inquiring (and slightly disturbed, or so say my players) minds want to know.


----------



## SteveC (Mar 26, 2007)

Just a brief note on the "item level" system. After reading it, you can trade in two items of a particular level for one of the next level up. The book mentions that this is a way for a character to have one or two powerful items, at the expense of most of the rest of their equipment. So it is possible for a PC or NPC to have a more powerful item than "normal" and still use the system.

Thought you'd like to know.

--Steve


----------



## Arnwyn (Mar 26, 2007)

SteveC said:
			
		

> Just a brief note on the "item level" system. After reading it, you can trade in two items of a particular level for one of the next level up. The book mentions that this is a way for a character to have one or two powerful items, at the expense of most of the rest of their equipment. So it is possible for a PC or NPC to have a more powerful item than "normal" and still use the system.
> 
> Thought you'd like to know.



Indeed - I did notice that, and that does put it closer to a 25% limit.

But still, wow... that's a far cry from the 50% that some ENWorlders use. And I do wonder what the WotC designers' assumption was/is when they develop CRs. 25 point buy? Check. GP wealth per level? Check. Maximum value of magic item? Maybe 25%...(?)

[Note that my MIC-related posts re: Item Levels are just a musing about the assumptions and expectations built into the system - knowing the guidelines allows me to better understand how the decisions I make affect the game.]


----------



## Vocenoctum (Mar 26, 2007)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Indeed - I did notice that, and that does put it closer to a 25% limit.
> 
> But still, wow... that's a far cry from the 50% that some ENWorlders use. And I do wonder what the WotC designers' assumption was/is when they develop CRs. 25 point buy? Check. GP wealth per level? Check. Maximum value of magic item? Maybe 25%...(?)
> 
> [Note that my MIC-related posts re: Item Levels are just a musing about the assumptions and expectations built into the system - knowing the guidelines allows me to better understand how the decisions I make affect the game.]





PHB2 has a "how to buy" guide, I don't have it handy, but IIRC a weapon was suggested as 40-50%, then armor and other stuff.


----------



## hamishspence (Mar 26, 2007)

*Randomisation*

I thought that the table had one big advantage. If you are a lazy dm, and randomly generate treasure, the table heavily nixes the risk of having an item way above character level. Using the DMG system, a (VERY LUCKY) roll on the major magic item table might mean that 10th level party beating 10th level monster gets a staff of power. BAD idea. And resentment if DM takes it away from party. with MIC table, you need a very lucky roll at 20th level, a 19th level party cannot find one.
the table implys that the lower limit for items should be 5 levels lower, upper limit 5 levels higher. Pretty sensible.

I liked the runestaffs. Augment crystals were a little too good, but if kept rare should not be overpowering. 

Pity there are no artifacts, but I suppose they should have a book to themselves.


----------



## Stalker0 (Mar 26, 2007)

One thing to consider with the whole "lower max gold per item" thing that's going on in the tables, is this is exactly the mindset MIC is encouraging. Look at the prices of most of the items, they are very very cheap. I think the MIC is encouraging players to have lots of little toys instead of throwing all their gold into a few uber items. The tables simply reinforce this further.


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 28, 2007)

Shil,

Only YOU would make the comment about intelligent loin cloths as intelligent magic items. 

Aggy,

Don't worry mate. I felt the same way even BEFORE I read more than a couple pages. The weapons didn't do much for me, nor did the armors. The rest...meh.


----------



## Kerrick (Mar 28, 2007)

> PHB2 has a "how to buy" guide, I don't have it handy, but IIRC a weapon was suggested as 40-50%, then armor and other stuff.



Yeah, it's under "A la Carte Shopping." They provide this section if you're in a rush, or don't know how (or are uncomfortable with) making/equipping a PC above 1st level. It says to check the NPC lists at your level for a rough idea of what you'll need, then gives you a remaining budget after you buy all that stuff. With the remainder, you spend 50% on a weapon, 75% of what's left on armor, and the rest on miscellaneous items - stat booster first, then whatever else you want and can afford.



> I thought that the table had one big advantage. If you are a lazy dm, and randomly generate treasure, the table heavily nixes the risk of having an item way above character level. Using the DMG system, a (VERY LUCKY) roll on the major magic item table might mean that 10th level party beating 10th level monster gets a staff of power. BAD idea. And resentment if DM takes it away from party.



If the DM rolls out in the open, instead of rolling in secret to determine what the party gets, then he's an idiot, and he deserves what he gets. Random treasure should _always_ be vetted for appropriateness before it's handed off to the players, no matter if the DM's doing it beforehand, when they find the loot, or after they crack open the chest in the town to see what's inside.



> One thing to consider with the whole "lower max gold per item" thing that's going on in the tables, is this is exactly the mindset MIC is encouraging. Look at the prices of most of the items, they are very very cheap. I think the MIC is encouraging players to have lots of little toys instead of throwing all their gold into a few uber items. The tables simply reinforce this further.



It would seem that way, yes... but they've also got those rules for combining several enchantments into one item. For instance, you have a Rog 18 (440K gp). He can get:

Bracers of armor +7 with +6 Dex (103K)*;
Amulet of natural armor +5 with +4 Con (74K)*;
Ring of protection +5 with a +10 skill bonus for climbing (55K)*;
Ring of mind shielding (8K);
Rapier +7 (market value, 98K);
Dagger/short sword +3 (market value, 18K);
Shortbow +3 (market value, 18K);
Cloak of resistance +4 (16).

That's 390K, meaning I've still 40,000 gp to spend on miscellaneous things, and I've _still_ managed to get most of my "big six" items - a weapon, armor, two stat boosters, natural armor, and save bonus.

[I think I got those prices right; the paragraph in the MIC that explains combined item pricing is really ambiguous and unclear.]


----------



## hong (Mar 28, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> It would seem that way, yes... but they've also got those rules for combining several enchantments into one item. For instance, you have a Rog 18 (440K gp). He can get:
> 
> Bracers of armor +7 with +6 Dex (103K)*;
> Amulet of natural armor +5 with +4 Con (74K)*;
> ...




It's pretty simple, really. If you want only big-six enchantments on an item, you add up the individual costs without any +50% fee for extra enchantments on the same item. You only pay the +50% extra if you want more than one funky special effect.

So:

Bracers of armor +7 with +6 Dex = 7^2*1000 + 6^2*1000 = 85000
Amulet of natural armor +5 with +4 Con = 5^2*2000 + 4^2*1000 = 66000
Ring of protection +5 with a +10 skill bonus for climbing = 5^2*2000 + 10^2*100 = 60000


----------



## Kerrick (Mar 28, 2007)

> It's pretty simple, really. If you want only big-six enchantments on an item, you add up the individual costs without any +50% fee for extra enchantments on the same item. You only pay the +50% extra if you want more than one funky special effect.



That's.... insane. Before, adding multiple abilities of ANY kind was "multiply the higher price by 2"; now it's "Multiply the lower by 1.5" and adding bonuses is straight "add the prices together"? No way. I told my friend about that, and he said, "I"m a powergamer DM, and *I* wouldn't allow that."

My rogue would have 61,000 gp left over - enough for a nice set of boots, a couple wands, several potions, and miscellaneous nonmagical gear, and probably _still_ have some gold left for a night on the town.


----------



## Zaukrie (Mar 28, 2007)

On this topic, why are runestaffs such high level. They sort of powerup as a player powers up. Why wouldn't you give them out earlier and let wizards grow into their more powerful uses?

I think that many, many items have a level much higher than I'd prefer.


----------



## MarkB (Mar 28, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> One thing to consider with the whole "lower max gold per item" thing that's going on in the tables, is this is exactly the mindset MIC is encouraging. Look at the prices of most of the items, they are very very cheap. I think the MIC is encouraging players to have lots of little toys instead of throwing all their gold into a few uber items. The tables simply reinforce this further.



Exactly. You've got to look at those tables in the context of the new approach to magic items that the book is encouraging. The idea is to offer players a wide enough choice of items at any price range that they'll invest in a range of different items instead of just concentrating on the one or two essentials. And if you buy a wider range of items, then inevitably the amount you can afford to spend on any one item will go down.


----------



## Mistwell (Mar 28, 2007)

Edheldur said:
			
		

> Follow up question: Were the pricing guidelines for the "big six" changed at all? (I recall reading somewhere that it's now cheaper to add the big six enhancements to existing magic items than it was before).




See:

http://www.circvsmaximvs.com/showpost.php?p=313273&postcount=48


----------



## James McMurray (Mar 28, 2007)

Can you wuote it here for those of us that aren't registered at circvsmaximvs?


----------



## Mistwell (Mar 28, 2007)

James McMurray said:
			
		

> Can you wuote it here for those of us that aren't registered at circvsmaximvs?




Sure.



> Adding Common Item Effects to Existing Items
> 
> One of the most frustrating roadblocks to using interesting, unusual magic items is that they take up body slots that you need for an ability-boosting item (such as gauntlets of ogre power), a ring or protection, or another must-have item. To address this issue, Magic Item Compendium presents official rules for adding common item effects to existing magic items.
> 
> ...


----------



## two (Mar 28, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I'm quite happy that they didn't up the price to include material I wouldn't use.
> 
> Cheers!








			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Please elaborate on this peculiar response. How exactly do you know that everything they cut was material you wouldn't use? Then we can go into the implicit notion that all the new items they included instead was stuff you have greater use for.




Just the normal and expected knee-jerk Merric defense of all things holy, i.e. WOTC.


----------



## Pielorinho (Mar 28, 2007)

two said:
			
		

> Just the normal and expected knee-jerk Merric defense of all things holy, i.e. WOTC.



Moderator's Notes
Absolutely inappropriate, *two*.  I need you to not post in this thread again, and I need you to review the forum rules.  You must maintain civility, courtesy, and respect, even toward your archnemesis, should said archnemesis ever choose to post on this board.

Daniel


----------



## shilsen (Mar 28, 2007)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Shil,
> 
> Only YOU would make the comment about intelligent loin cloths as intelligent magic items.




Hey, you have Orcus - I have intelligent loincloths! Everybody needs a ... um ... er ... specialty. Yeah, that's it!


----------



## pawsplay (Mar 28, 2007)

hong said:
			
		

> It's pretty simple, really. If you want only big-six enchantments on an item, you add up the individual costs without any +50% fee for extra enchantments on the same item. You only pay the +50% extra if you want more than one funky special effect.
> 
> So:
> 
> ...




*cough*


----------



## Remathilis (Mar 28, 2007)

hong said:
			
		

> It's pretty simple, really. If you want only big-six enchantments on an item, you add up the individual costs without any +50% fee for extra enchantments on the same item. You only pay the +50% extra if you want more than one funky special effect.




In addition, there are some items that give similar benefits to the big-six without the costly expenses. For example, Stamina (Improved, Greater) Armor Property gives a +1/+3/+5 Resist bonus to saves at 1/2 the cost of a cloak of resistance. A great deal for those armor-wearing characters who still want a cool cloak to use. 

Back to hong's post, the bonuses you can give are limited to resistance bonus to saves, AC bonus to non-armor, deflection bonus, enhancement bonus to ability score, or energy resistance. All are pretty common, and Very useful. I think I'm going to start giving more "combo" items out personally, such as cloaks of energy Resist/Resist, Rings of Deflect/Resist, or Boots of Speed/Dex.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 29, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> That's.... insane. Before, adding multiple abilities of ANY kind was "multiply the higher price by 2"; now it's "Multiply the lower by 1.5" and adding bonuses is straight "add the prices together"? No way. I told my friend about that, and he said, "I"m a powergamer DM, and *I* wouldn't allow that."




The reason for it is to stop the dominance of the Big Six over any other item. So, you can the Big 6 effect whilst still having another item. (Big 6 items are so expensive that a *1.5 modifier would just mean you'd use the Big 6 item rather than more interesting - but less effective - item).

Cheers!


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 29, 2007)

shilsen said:
			
		

> Hey, you have Orcus - I have intelligent loincloths! Everybody needs a ... um ... er ... specialty. Yeah, that's it!




Yes I have Orcus but I also have the Scarred Lands too. There are standards man. But eh whatever.


----------



## Felon (Mar 29, 2007)

johnnype said:
			
		

> you might want to read the articles WotC has on their website about how they put the book together. Bottom line is that many, if not most, of the magic items that have appeared before the MIC sucked ass so they dropped them completely.



I did read it, but I don't know what you think I'd get from it. Clearly, if I'm lamenting the fact they didn't include the magic weapon properties from The Complete Warrior, then I'm not just gonna turn around and say "oooh, I see; those properties I liked actually sucked--that explains it!" In fact, some were actually pretty darn good. Exit wound was a great property for a projectile weapon, for instance, and really the sort of thing that should be the exclusive province of a magic weapon property rather than a feat or class feature.

Many of the new items are actually kind of boring, as they just add a mechanical bonus or simulate a spell, with only a few actually grant any interesting new capabilities--but then again, I suspect items that incorporate ingenuity into their design would probably wind up on the "suck" list for not providing easily quantifiable numbers to plug into a character.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 29, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Many of the new items are actually kind of boring, as they just add a mechanical bonus or simulate a spell, with only a few actually grant any interesting new capabilities--but then again, I suspect items that incorporate ingenuity into their design would probably wind up on the "suck" list for not providing easily quantifiable numbers to plug into a character.




"Simulate a spell" demonstrates the problem magic items have: if an effect can be made as a magic item, it can also be made as a spell. I think the biggest difference that magic items have is that they can do several things, rather than just the one of spells. (Magic items as the new Emotion! )

Personally, I think that being able to activate many of the magic item effects with swift actions is really nice. 

Can you remind me what the Exit Wound property did?

Cheers!


----------



## Greg K (Mar 29, 2007)

I was at the bookstore this afternoon and decided to take a look at the book. I randomly flipped through various sections and nothing that I saw resonated with me.  I don't know if it was just bad luck, different tastes ( a possibility since I dislike most of WOTCs supplements) or what.  I suppose that I will give the book a second chance and take another look at it on another day.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 29, 2007)

Greg K said:
			
		

> I was at the bookstore this afternoon and decided to take a look at the book. I randomly flipped through various sections and nothing that I saw resonated with me.  I don't know if it was just bad luck, different tastes ( a possibility since I dislike most of WOTCs supplements) or what.  I suppose that I will give the book a second chance and take another look at it on another day.




When you do, look up the _vest of the archmagi_. 

Cheers!


----------



## Edheldur (Mar 29, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Sure.



Thanks for the quote and the link, Mistwell! I gotta say I really, REALLY like the pricing guidelines for the most common abilities.


----------



## hong (Mar 29, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> That's.... insane. Before, adding multiple abilities of ANY kind was "multiply the higher price by 2"; now it's "Multiply the lower by 1.5" and adding bonuses is straight "add the prices together"? No way. I told my friend about that, and he said, "I"m a powergamer DM, and *I* wouldn't allow that."
> 
> My rogue would have 61,000 gp left over - enough for a nice set of boots, a couple wands, several potions, and miscellaneous nonmagical gear, and probably _still_ have some gold left for a night on the town.




Psst. You can get _exactly_ the same effect by simply spreading out your items across body slots.

Bracers of armor +7
Gloves +6 Dex
Amulet of natural armor +5
Shirt +4 Con
Ring of protection +5
Boots +10 Climb

Sure, some of these take up nonstandard slots, but by combining enchantments you're already into the realm of custom items. And bracers of +7 armour and +6 Dex is nonstandard for Dex.

The biggest effect of this rule change is that people no longer have to spread their magic around. Personally I find gloves of +6 Dex, +6 Str to be much more thematic and interesting than gloves +6 Dex and a belt +6 Str. Similarly an amulet of +6 Con, +6 Wis is more thematic than an amulet of +6 Con and a headband of +6 Wis.


----------



## Nightfall (Mar 29, 2007)

Shil,

So...what else intelligent to you wear around your nethers? Or have your females wear around their unmentionables?


----------



## shilsen (Mar 29, 2007)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Shil,
> 
> So...what else intelligent to you wear around your nethers?




Actually, I'm too intelligent to wear anything around my nethers. Clothing is the work of the devil. And posting is always done better in the nude.



> Or have your females wear around their unmentionables?




Sadly for my players, I don't regard anything as unmentionable


----------



## DaveMage (Mar 29, 2007)

shilsen said:
			
		

> Actually, I'm too intelligent to wear anything around my nethers. Clothing is the work of the devil. And posting is always done better in the nude.





T.....M.....I......


----------



## Rackhir (Mar 29, 2007)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> T.....M.....I......




At least we finally got him to start wearing clothes when he DMs. We're still working on the whole slathering his flesh with butter bit, but one step at a time.


----------



## Kerrick (Mar 29, 2007)

> Psst. You can get _exactly_ the same effect by simply spreading out your items across body slots.



Yes, I know that. But my complaint is that by combining several effects into one item, they're unbalancing the items - the balance factor, IMO, was in having slots in the first place, so that you have to pick and choose what you're going to use. 



> And bracers of +7 armour and +6 Dex is nonstandard for Dex.



No it's not. Dex item affinity is Arms, Hands, and Feet.



> The biggest effect of this rule change is that people no longer have to spread their magic around. Personally I find gloves of +6 Dex, +6 Str to be much more thematic and interesting than gloves +6 Dex and a belt +6 Str. Similarly an amulet of +6 Con, +6 Wis is more thematic than an amulet of +6 Con and a headband of +6 Wis.



Thematic? *shrugs* YMMV.


----------



## hong (Mar 30, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> Yes, I know that. But my complaint is that by combining several effects into one item, they're unbalancing the items - the balance factor, IMO, was in having slots in the first place, so that you have to pick and choose what you're going to use.




Tell me which of

Bracers of armor +7
Gloves +6 Dex
Amulet of natural armor +5
Shirt +4 Con
Ring of protection +5
Boots +10 Climb

is in a slot that doesn't match its affinity.


----------



## Kerrick (Mar 30, 2007)

> Tell me which of
> 
> Bracers of armor +7
> Gloves +6 Dex
> ...



I never said any of them weren't. My point, which I don't seem to be making very clear, is that MY rogue still has all those slots open for other things, whereas YOURS doesn't.


----------



## Stalker0 (Mar 30, 2007)

Kerrick's point is that your magical power was partly limited by the fact you had only so many slots to take up. If you wanted to free up slots, it either cost you 50% more (add it to another slot) or 100% more (slotless).

With the new system, while the big 6 aren't the only items a player is likely to get, they are easier to get because he doesn't have to worry about slots anymore (hmm...should I get gauntlets of str +2 or gloves of dex +2....oh, I'll just get both and put them in the same slot).

But on the same token, the idea of the MIC is to provide neat alternatives to the big 6, so that while players are still going to get resistance bonuses and stat bonuses, etc, they may wait on them awhile to get some of these new cool items.

My main concern is that some of the new items are so cheap, many players will have no problem crafting slotless versions of them or add them to other items (assuming the DM allows it). I think some of the balance of these items is the slots they take up, when you remove that they may become too powerful for their cost.

I'll give an example, the boots of ultimate athletism. Lets you take 10 on some physical skills, and 1/day you can take 20. As is, its fine, takes up a boot slot, some people will love these, some will want boots of speed or boots of flying, etc. But if I can combine that with another kind of boot I just gained a high level rogue class ability for dirt cheap. Its something to be wary of.


----------



## chitzk0i (Mar 30, 2007)

Remathilis said:
			
		

> In addition, there are some items that give similar benefits to the big-six without the costly expenses. For example, Stamina (Improved, Greater) Armor Property gives a +1/+3/+5 Resist bonus to saves at 1/2 the cost of a cloak of resistance. A great deal for those armor-wearing characters who still want a cool cloak to use.




1/2 the cost and 1/3 the benefit.  To get the same effect as a _cloak of resistance +1_, you'd have to spend 1500 gold instead of just 1,000.


----------



## The Grackle (Mar 30, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I'll give an example, the boots of ultimate athletism. Lets you take 10 on some physical skills, and 1/day you can take 20. As is, its fine, takes up a boot slot, some people will love these, some will want boots of speed or boots of flying, etc. But if I can combine that with another kind of boot I just gained a high level rogue class ability for dirt cheap. Its something to be wary of.




Is that how it works?  I thought it only worked on the genero-bix-6-items.  Combining boots of speed and boots of elvenkind and boots of S&S might not work, but making your boots add a +2 enh to saves might.  

I don't know though, I haven't looked at the book yet.


----------



## The Grackle (Mar 30, 2007)

I think body-slots are not a great way to control magic item use and abuse.  It's a relic of the old editions.  Now we have bonus types that don't stack and THAT's the real way magic items are managed.  

Personally, I like the idea of a character with one or two reallly powerful items than one with a hundred different items all over (and orbiting) his body.


----------



## Jhaelen (Mar 30, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> My main concern is that some of the new items are so cheap, many players will have no problem crafting slotless versions of them or add them to other items (assuming the DM allows it). I think some of the balance of these items is the slots they take up, when you remove that they may become too powerful for their cost.



Imho, with the advent of the MIC the DMG guidelines for pricing magic items have become obsolete. 

Basically the 'behind the curtain' sidebar on page 233 explains that any attempt to create reliable formulas to determine an appropriate price of magic items is doomed. It stresses that the DMG is just there to provide estimates; no more no less.
So, no DM should feel obliged to allow slotless versions of items for double the normal price (or allow slotless versions at all).


----------



## James McMurray (Mar 30, 2007)

What? I can no longer accost my DM with cries of "but the table says I can be permanently large for 2,000gp!"? What is this game coming to.


----------



## Stalker0 (Mar 30, 2007)

The Grackle said:
			
		

> Is that how it works?  I thought it only worked on the genero-bix-6-items.  Combining boots of speed and boots of elvenkind and boots of S&S might not work, but making your boots add a +2 enh to saves might.
> 
> I don't know though, I haven't looked at the book yet.




For these, you do have to pay more. But the initial benefit is so cheap paying 50% more is no big deal. What I'm suggesting is the cost of the slot is implicit in the cheap cost of the item (aka, the fact that you wear these boots prevents you from wearing other boots). When you can start combining items, some of the abilities they grant are too cheap imo.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Mar 30, 2007)

By the MIC, adding +2 dexterity to a pair of Gloves of Manual Prowess now costs just 4000gp instead of 4000*1.5 = 6000. But what if I already have gloves of dex and want to add the manual prowess feature (base cost 3000)? Would that cost 3000 or 4500gp?


----------



## Felon (Mar 31, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> Can you remind me what the Exit Wound property did?



Basically, you could thread your enemies with a projectile. The weapon did 1d6 extra damage and allowed at a shot at any targets in line behind the initial (albeit with the -4 penalty for soft cover). 

That's the sort of thing that's lame as a feat or class feature, as it's more dependent on the weapon's function than any skill an archer might have (yes, I'm aware of the feat in PHBII that does something like that--like I said, kinda lame).


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Mar 31, 2007)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> By the MIC, adding +2 dexterity to a pair of Gloves of Manual Prowess now costs just 4000gp instead of 4000*1.5 = 6000. But what if I already have gloves of dex and want to add the manual prowess feature (base cost 3000)? Would that cost 3000 or 4500gp?




I cant think of a reason why it shouldn't work both ways, can anyone else?

I just got this yesterday. Man it makes me exited about magic items. this book is A+ at the moment. I give it a few weeks for it to settle to a B+ or A


----------



## blargney the second (Mar 31, 2007)

I just got a confirmation from Amazon that my Complete Loot is on the way.  *happy dance*
-blarg


----------



## Kerrick (Mar 31, 2007)

> Kerrick's point is that your magical power was partly limited by the fact you had only so many slots to take up. If you wanted to free up slots, it either cost you 50% more (add it to another slot) or 100% more (slotless).



That's exactly what I meant, thank you.



> I think body-slots are not a great way to control magic item use and abuse. It's a relic of the old editions. Now we have bonus types that don't stack and THAT's the real way magic items are managed.



"Body slots" weren't formally introduced until the advent of d20. Before that, there were just guidelines as to what you could wear and where, and how many (one ring/hand, e.g.). I agree, though, that using ability affinities with the slots makes a bit more sense.



> Imho, with the advent of the MIC the DMG guidelines for pricing magic items have become obsolete.



The MIC made them obsolete because the designers pretty much ignored them and made their own. Case in point: adding multiple abilities to an item is now 1.5 times the lower ability cost, instead of 2 times the higher one. This rule in particular is the largest part of my problem with the stacking abilities system - a smart player who wants an ability-boosting item will get himself something cheap, like boots of levitation, and add in a Dex bonus at cost, instead of the price of the entire item x1.5 (or the lower price x1.5, depending on which system you use). 



> Personally, I like the idea of a character with one or two reallly powerful items than one with a hundred different items all over (and orbiting) his body.



But... this book is encouraging the latter, by making everything cheaper, and making combining abilities cheaper also. Which is my second major gripe with the book - players were limited in the number of items they could have by the number of slots they had and, to a lesser degree, by their wealth, if they're made from scratch). You're still limited by slots now, but with the cheaper costs for combining things, you free up slots for other things - more magic items.



> By the MIC, adding +2 dexterity to a pair of Gloves of Manual Prowess now costs just 4000gp instead of 4000*1.5 = 6000. But what if I already have gloves of dex and want to add the manual prowess feature (base cost 3000)? Would that cost 3000 or 4500gp?



4,500 gp. Ability bonuses added to an item don't incur the x1.5 cost, but everything else does.


----------



## Cheiromancer (Mar 31, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> > By the MIC, adding +2 dexterity to a pair of Gloves of Manual Prowess now costs just 4000gp instead of 4000*1.5 = 6000. But what if I already have gloves of dex and want to add the manual prowess feature (base cost 3000)? Would that cost 3000 or 4500gp?
> 
> 
> 
> 4,500 gp. Ability bonuses added to an item don't incur the x1.5 cost, but everything else does.



Ugh.  I hate it when the order you add things makes a difference. Those items *should* have the same price.  Not that I'm contradicting your interpretation of the rules; I'm just expressing a desire for the rules to be otherwise.


----------



## Marshall (Mar 31, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> "Body slots" weren't formally introduced until the advent of d20. Before that, there were just guidelines as to what you could wear and where, and how many (one ring/hand, e.g.). I agree, though, that using ability affinities with the slots makes a bit more sense.




No it doesnt. Affinities are ONLY there to artificially create a use for the Forge Ring feat.



> The MIC made them obsolete because the designers pretty much ignored them and made their own.




The designers recognized that the artificial cost inflation in the DMG was making anything but the big six COST several times its VALUE. This leads to PCs being equiped with nothing but 'Big Six' items.



> Case in point: adding multiple abilities to an item is now 1.5 times the lower ability cost, instead of 2 times the higher one. This rule in particular is the largest part of my problem with the stacking abilities system - a smart player who wants an ability-boosting item will get himself something cheap, like boots of levitation, and add in a Dex bonus at cost, instead of the price of the entire item x1.5 (or the lower price x1.5, depending on which system you use).




Uh, since you dont have the rule correct to start with you cant fault the designers for your just now realizing it.
The only time an item costs 2x the base value, with the DMG calcs,  is if its both the second ability AND in the wrong slot. Even slotless is only a +%50 upcharge. You ALWAYS mulitply the lower cost enhancement by 1.5 and add in the flat cost of the higher cost enhancement. 

As such, this rule change means very little in the large scheme of things. In effect your only saving the upcharge on the relatively cheap base items from the MIC.



> But... this book is encouraging the latter, by making everything cheaper, and making combining abilities cheaper also. Which is my second major gripe with the book - players were limited in the number of items they could have by the number of slots they had and, to a lesser degree, by their wealth, if they're made from scratch). You're still limited by slots now, but with the cheaper costs for combining things, you free up slots for other things - more magic items.




Its more a recognition that the games base assumptions include PCs having 'Big Six' items and that anything preventing gaining them had better have comparable ability or allow it altogether.
IOW, an _Amulet of Health+6_ is worth 36kgp, never 48kgp or 72kgp.



> 4,500 gp. Ability bonuses added to an item don't incur the x1.5 cost, but everything else does.




Technically, you cant add _Gloves of Manual Prowess_ to Gloves of Dex+2. The GoMP are a specific item. However, theres nothing specific in the rules about what happens when you add to a standard enhanced item.


----------



## Agamon (Apr 1, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> If you have it, look up the _vest of the archmagi_ (page 145). Too cool.




Very cool item and pretty funny write up.


----------



## Twowolves (Apr 1, 2007)

Am I missing something, or is there a reason why the Spellcraft DC under the "aura" entries in the MIC just seem to be incredibly inaccurate? It's 15+spell level of highest spell effect, right? A quick glance through a few entries has that being the correct number less than 1/3 of the time!


----------



## hong (Apr 1, 2007)

I think it's fairly clear that the intent with the rules for improving magic items is that there are 2 categories of effects: the "big six" effects (more plusses) and the special stuff (enchantments beyond just straight bonuses). An item can have one big-six effect and one special enchantment without any +50% extra cost. Adding ADDITIONAL special enchantments is what incurs the +50%.

Any other interpretation results in item prices varying depending on the order in which enchantments are added. This is counter to the basic principle in place since 3E, and which noone at WotC has ever indicated was problematic.

In fact, the same principle for pricing item upgrades is still at work. You take the price if the upgraded item was created from scratch, and subtract the price of the starting item.


----------



## hong (Apr 1, 2007)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> By the MIC, adding +2 dexterity to a pair of Gloves of Manual Prowess now costs just 4000gp instead of 4000*1.5 = 6000. But what if I already have gloves of dex and want to add the manual prowess feature (base cost 3000)? Would that cost 3000 or 4500gp?




3000 gp. The upgraded item is gloves of manual prowess, +2 Dex. Creating this item from scratch would be 3000 + 4000 = 7000. The starting item is 4000 gp. Taking the difference gives 3000.


----------



## Kerrick (Apr 1, 2007)

> Ugh. I hate it when the order you add things makes a difference. Those items *should* have the same price. Not that I'm contradicting your interpretation of the rules; I'm just expressing a desire for the rules to be otherwise.



Amen to that. That's one of my problems with epic - the ever-popular "Ftr 20/Wiz 20 vs. Wiz 20/Ftr 20" debate.



> No it doesnt. Affinities are ONLY there to artificially create a use for the Forge Ring feat.



.... You're joking, right?   



> The designers recognized that the artificial cost inflation in the DMG was making anything but the big six COST several times its VALUE. This leads to PCs being equiped with nothing but 'Big Six' items.



I'm not sure what you're considering "artificial cost inflation". If the formulas in the DMG were pricing things too high, why didn't they just change THOSE, and reprice items in the MIC according to the new formulas, thereby a) giving us more reasonably priced non-Big-Six items, and b) giving us a new system whereby we can reprice items from other sources with a set system, instead of "Well, just eyeball it and give it a price based on its apparent value."



> Uh, since you dont have the rule correct to start with you cant fault the designers for your just now realizing it.
> The only time an item costs 2x the base value, with the DMG calcs, is if its both the second ability AND in the wrong slot. Even slotless is only a +%50 upcharge. You ALWAYS mulitply the lower cost enhancement by 1.5 and add in the flat cost of the higher cost enhancement.



Actually we're both wrong, but I'm closer to being right. 

_Uncustomary space limitation:_ Multiply entire cost by 1.5.
_No space limitation (i.e., slotless):_ Multiply entire cost by 2.
_Multiple different abilities:_ Multiply higher item cost by 2.

Like I said, I could see adding ability/skill/whatever bonuses to an item with which it has an affinity for a reduced cost (adding a Dex bonus to gloves of swimming and climbing for 1.5 times the value instead of 2 times value). I also think that "the value" should be the value of the ability being added, no matter if its more or less than the existing one - if you were to add +2 Dex to any set of gloves, it would be 6,000 gp. Period.



> Technically, you cant add Gloves of Manual Prowess to Gloves of Dex+2. The GoMP are a specific item. However, theres nothing specific in the rules about what happens when you add to a standard enhanced item.



Actually, you can - see below.



> I think it's fairly clear that the intent with the rules for improving magic items is that there are 2 categories of effects: the "big six" effects (more plusses) and the special stuff (enchantments beyond just straight bonuses). An item can have one big-six effect and one special enchantment without any +50% extra cost. Adding ADDITIONAL special enchantments is what incurs the +50%.



Sure, if you add the Bix Six bonus into an existing item, there won't be any additional cost. If you do it the other way around, though, you're paying through the nose for it.

There's a paragraph on p. 233, right column, that says if the item you're adding occupies a body slot (boots of striding and springing, e.g.) you can add it to an existing item of that same slot (slippers of spider climbing) for 1.5 times the cost of the enchantment OR the value of the new power plus 1/2 the value of the existing item, if the new power costs more. The example they use is adding the feather falling ability to a ring of climbing - it would be 3,300 gp, the cost of the feather fall x1.5. So I was right in pricing Doug's gloves, but for the wrong reason. 



> Any other interpretation results in item prices varying depending on the order in which enchantments are added. This is counter to the basic principle in place since 3E, and which noone at WotC has ever indicated was problematic.



See my above explanation. I agree - it's stupid, but that's apparently how they're doing it now. I'd love to be proven wrong, though.


----------



## Agamon (Apr 1, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> There's a paragraph on p. 233, right column, that says if the item you're adding occupies a body slot (boots of striding and springing, e.g.) you can add it to an existing item of that same slot (slippers of spider climbing) for 1.5 times the cost of the enchantment OR the value of the new power plus 1/2 the value of the existing item, if the new power costs more. The example they use is adding the feather falling ability to a ring of climbing - it would be 3,300 gp, the cost of the feather fall x1.5. So I was right in pricing Doug's gloves, but for the wrong reason.




Both examples are of two non-"Big 6" abilities, and shows how it works, both ways, with two non-exception abilities.  You are infering that this must be how it works with the exceptioned abilities because of a somewhat ambiguous rule explanation.  I think the intent is that adding the powers either way costs the same (and yes, if you go strictly by letter of the RAW, you could argue that this isn't true, but why argue for something that you yourself agrees makes no sense?).

I'd say there will be errata to fix this soon, and if it bugs you until then, just do it the way that makes sense to you.


----------



## Mistwell (Apr 1, 2007)

hong said:
			
		

> 3000 gp. The upgraded item is gloves of manual prowess, +2 Dex. Creating this item from scratch would be 3000 + 4000 = 7000. The starting item is 4000 gp. Taking the difference gives 3000.




Indeed.  For example, from the MIC Page 233:



> You can add new magical abilities to a magic item with virtually no restrictions. The cost and prerequisites to do this are the same as if the item was not magical. Thus, a +1 longsword can be made into a +2 vorpal longsword, with the cost to create it being equal to that of a +2 vorpal longsword minus the cost of a +1 longsword (93,315 - 2,313 = 96,000 gp).




This process of subtracting the new from the old would hold regardless of which item you started with and which ability you were adding.  It doesn't matter what order you do it in, you get the same end price.


----------



## Archon of Light (Apr 1, 2007)

To me, this book not only enhances the Core Rules of DnD on it's own, but it makes it more complete than any other book released to date. You can nitpick about item costs and conversions all day long, if that's your thing. But you cannot argue the three greatest contributions to the core game that this book has to offer.

*1. Magic Item Diversity:* When players come across a set of magic bracers now, it's no longer either _Armor_ or _Archery_. It's no longer a given that every magic bracer found will go to the character with the bow or doesn't wear armor. There are many more types of every type of item designed for every type of character caste out there.

*2. Low-level Items:* For years, the game struggled to provide decent and balanced items for characters at lower levels. This book has done a tremendous job in filling that particular niche in creating magic items that were not only useable and balanced for low-level characters, but also making them interesting and desireable items.

*3. Item Levels:* Finally, there is a measuring stick to see how these items stack up with one another, and whether your characters are either overpowered or underpowered with their personal inventories. Should you allow the 6th level Rogue in the party to have a _Dagger of Venom_? Is a _+3 Heavy Steel Shield_ an even trade for a _+3 Longsword_? Does the 9th level Paladin already have too many 'strong' items, or would this _Shield of Mercy_ (MIC, pg21) be appropriate for him since he doesn't have a magic shield yet? Before this book, you could get a hundred different answers to any of these questions from a hundred different people.

There is so much more to this book than just 'a big collection of magic items'. It will really enhance your gaming experience, especially if you're tired of equipping all your bad guys with the usual _Ring of Protection +1_, _Cloak of Resistance +1_, and _Gauntlets of Ogre Strength_. I have been utilizing this book to reconfigure and evaluate the awesome *Red Hand of Doom* adventure on the WoTC boards, but if there is interest, I might post it here as well.


----------



## Agamon (Apr 1, 2007)

Archon of Light said:
			
		

> There is so much more to this book than just 'a big collection of magic items'. It will really enhance your gaming experience, especially if you're tired of equipping all your bad guys with the usual _Ring of Protection +1_, _Cloak of Resistance +1_, and _Gauntlets of Ogre Strength_. I have been utilizing this book to reconfigure and evaluate the awesome *Red Hand of Doom* adventure on the WoTC boards, but if there is interest, I might post it here as well.




QFT


----------



## Cheiromancer (Apr 1, 2007)

> I have been utilizing this book to reconfigure and evaluate the awesome Red Hand of Doom adventure on the WoTC boards, but if there is interest, I might post it here as well.




:looks interested:

Even a link would be nice; I don't know my way around the WotC boards.


----------



## Archon of Light (Apr 1, 2007)

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> :looks interested:
> 
> Even a link would be nice; I don't know my way around the WotC boards.




Ah, guess that would be nice of me...   

Part I and Part II.


----------



## hong (Apr 2, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> Sure, if you add the Bix Six bonus into an existing item, there won't be any additional cost. If you do it the other way around, though, you're paying through the nose for it.




There is nothing that requires this, and in fact the algorithm given in the book presupposes a unique cost for everything.



> There's a paragraph on p. 233, right column, that says if the item you're adding occupies a body slot (boots of striding and springing, e.g.) you can add it to an existing item of that same slot (slippers of spider climbing) for 1.5 times the cost of the enchantment OR the value of the new power plus 1/2 the value of the existing item, if the new power costs more. The example they use is adding the feather falling ability to a ring of climbing - it would be 3,300 gp, the cost of the feather fall x1.5.




Yes, because competence bonuses to skills don't appear in Table 6-11, Adding/Improving Common Item Effects. And thus they fall into the category of "special stuff" whose cost is increased by 50%.


----------



## Kerrick (Apr 2, 2007)

> Both examples are of two non-"Big 6" abilities, and shows how it works, both ways, with two non-exception abilities. You are infering that this must be how it works with the exceptioned abilities because of a somewhat ambiguous rule explanation.



By "exceptioned abilities" I assume you mean "Big Six" stuff? If so, then no - that part's pretty clear.



> I think the intent is that adding the powers either way costs the same (and yes, if you go strictly by letter of the RAW, you could argue that this isn't true, but why argue for something that you yourself agrees makes no sense?).



That might well be (that they cost the same either way) - that entire section is really badly written. It'd certainly be nice (and make more sense) if it were.



> I'd say there will be errata to fix this soon, and if it bugs you until then, just do it the way that makes sense to you.



Or better yet, toss the rule out entirely and just go back to the DMG.



> This process of subtracting the new from the old would hold regardless of which item you started with and which ability you were adding. It doesn't matter what order you do it in, you get the same end price.



No, that applies to upgrading items only - if you have a +1 sword and you want to make it +2, or gloves of Dexerity +4 and you want to make them +6. It does NOT apply if you want to add manual prowess to gloves of dexterity, or feather falling to a ring of jumping.



> There is nothing that requires this, and in fact the algorithm given in the book presupposes a unique cost for everything.



Huh? The paragraph on 233 seems to imply it - if Lidda had boots of Dexterity +2 and she wanted to add striding and springing, she'd pay extra for it, because striding and springing is not a "common item effect", as you pointed out.


----------



## hong (Apr 2, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> That might well be (that they cost the same either way) - that entire section is really badly written. It'd certainly be nice (and make more sense) if it were.




The only one who seems to be interpreting it the silly way seems to be you. So why are you doing it?



> No, that applies to upgrading items only - if you have a +1 sword and you want to make it +2, or gloves of Dexerity +4 and you want to make them +6. It does NOT apply if you want to add manual prowess to gloves of dexterity, or feather falling to a ring of jumping.




Why not?




> Huh? The paragraph on 233 seems to imply it - if Lidda had boots of Dexterity +2 and she wanted to add striding and springing, she'd pay extra for it, because striding and springing is not a "common item effect", as you pointed out.




No, because striding & springing is not an ADDITIONAL special effect. It's the first special effect, on top of the +2 Dex.


----------



## Kerrick (Apr 3, 2007)

> The only one who seems to be interpreting it the silly way seems to be you. So why are you doing it?



I dunno.. it looked pretty clear to me until everyone started telling me I had it wrong. I'll submit the paragraph in question for the general populace, since not everyone's got the book yet.



> In most cases, if the item is one that occupies a body slot, the cost of adding any additional ability to that item is 1-1/2 times the value of the added power (or the value of the add power plus 1/2 the value of the existing item, if the added power normally costs more than the existing item). For example, if the character adds the power to confer _feather falling_ to her _ring of jumping_, the cost of adding the ability is 3,300 gp, the same as for creating a _ring of feather falling_ times 1-1/2. On the other hand, if she were addiong the power of a _ring of force shield_ to that _ring of jumping_, the cost of adding the ability woulid be 9,750 gp (8,500 gp for the _ring of force shield_ plus half of 2,500 gp, the price of a _ring of jumping_.)






> Why not?



See above.



> No, because striding & springing is not an ADDITIONAL special effect. It's the first special effect, on top of the +2 Dex.



Now who's being pedantic? ANY magical effect is a "special effect", be it a +1 enhancement bonus, a +6 stat boost, or the power to blow up an entire city. See the quote below:



> This added cost doesn't necessarily apply when adding some common effects to existing items; see below.




Adding "common effects" to an existing magic item doesn't trigger the multiplier; we can all agree on that one. Adding anything else, however, does.


----------



## hong (Apr 3, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> I dunno.. it looked pretty clear to me until everyone started telling me I had it wrong.




That should tell you something.



> I'll submit the paragraph in question for the general populace, since not everyone's got the book yet.




Fascinating.



> Now who's being pedantic?




Well, I'd be entirely happy to go by the common sense approach to the rules, but it seems some people only respond to pedantry.



> ANY magical effect is a "special effect", be it a +1 enhancement bonus, a +6 stat boost, or the power to blow up an entire city.




Why?



> Adding "common effects" to an existing magic item doesn't trigger the multiplier; we can all agree on that one. Adding anything else, however, does.




No.

It's very simple. The general principle for pricing enchantments in 3E/3.5E is that the order of adding stuff doesn't matter. There is _one_ price for any given combination of powers, and it doesn't matter whether you add A to B, or B to A. There is nothing in MIC, save some ambiguously worded paragraphs, to suggest this principle has changed. In fact, the examples given in that section imply the principle is still the same: they all reference a single price for an item, without any mention that the order is supposed to affect things.

From this principle, it is obvious that "add common effects to an existing magic item" is meant to be interpreted as "create a magic item with both common and special effects". By assuming otherwise, for no reason that I can tell, all you've achieved is to create a rod to beat yourself with. Cease with the pointless nitpicking, or I will be forced to assume you like beating yourself.


Hong "and that's MY schtick" Ooi


----------



## Kestrel (Apr 3, 2007)

Its the witty banter that keeps me coming back for more!


----------



## Mistwell (Apr 3, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> I dunno.. it looked pretty clear to me until everyone started telling me I had it wrong. I'll submit the paragraph in question for the general populace, since not everyone's got the book yet.




Kerrick, when your players start a character at level 10, and they already have items on them, and you want to determine what their items are valued at to compare it to the guidelines for character wealth per level, are you going to roll randomly to determine which thing was added to the items first (in the case of items that involve a common ability)?

Worse, when your characters find an item that has a common ability on it and a non-common one, what will you tell them about what it is worth?

What can those characters sell the item for, since the price will apparently vary depending on the order of events that happened when the item was created?

I think you are adding a needlessly complicated element to this new system.  Magic items are fungible.  Their value/price/cost doesn't vary depending on what order you add abilities to them.


----------



## Stalker0 (Apr 3, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I think you are adding a needlessly complicated element to this new system.  Magic items are fungible.  Their value/price/cost doesn't vary depending on what order you add abilities to them.




So them the question becomes, which of the abilities do you x1.5? Is it the more expensive one, or the less expensive one?


----------



## Kestrel (Apr 4, 2007)

So who's going to put together the random generator tool using the tables in the back of the book?  I can't be bothered to roll dice, need to push a button!


----------



## Kerrick (Apr 4, 2007)

> Why?



... What do you mean "why"? What do YOU call them? What do you define as a "special effect"?



> It's very simple. The general principle for pricing enchantments in 3E/3.5E is that the order of adding stuff doesn't matter. There is _one_ price for any given combination of powers, and it doesn't matter whether you add A to B, or B to A.



Right, I'm with you so far.



> There is nothing in MIC, save some ambiguously worded paragraphs, to suggest this principle has changed.



I'm glad you're finally acknowledging that it's not my fault that I'm misinterpreting this. I'm a reasonably intelligent person; I have an English degree. I think I can read a section of text and puzzle out the meaning, but this one is, like you said, rather poorly worded and leads to silly rules arguments like this one.



> In fact, the examples given in that section imply the principle is still the same: they all reference a single price for an item, without any mention that the order is supposed to affect things.



Let's trot out that paragraph again, shall we?



> In most cases, if the item is one that occupies a body slot, the cost of *adding any additional ability*...



Any additional ability. Not "special effects" or "common effects". 



> ...to that item is 1-1/2 times the value of the added power (or the value of the added power plus 1/2 the value of the existing item, if the added power normally costs more than the existing item).



Here's the clincher, the part where it implies that order DOES matter. (BTW, I left out part of that; I'm surprised someone didn't call me on it.) If the new ability costs LESS than the existing item, you multiply the new ability by 1.5. If the new ability costs MORE than the existing item, then you add the new ability's cost and multiply the existing item's cost by 1.5.

You know... once I wrote that out, and looked at it, it actually made sense. It's 1.5 times the lesser ability. Why the **** couldn't they have said just that, instead of making some convoluted, obscure sentence that idiots like me are bound to misinterpret?



> From this principle, it is obvious that "add common effects to an existing magic item" is meant to be interpreted as "create a magic item with both common and special effects". By assuming otherwise, for no reason that I can tell, all you've achieved is to create a rod to beat yourself with. Cease with the pointless nitpicking, or I will be forced to assume you like beating yourself.



Didn't you hear, flagellation leads to enlightenment? You should try it some time. Worked for me.


----------



## Stalker0 (Apr 4, 2007)

One thing that disapoints me about the new book is most of the saves don't scale. I've seen one, menacing, in which the save is based on the person weilding it. Others like blinding remain the same. The problem is they quickly become useless, who cares about a DC 14 fort save at level 20?

Actually speaking of blinding, my copy has it in the list, but its not listed among the other weapon properties. A big typo indeed.


----------



## hong (Apr 5, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> ... What do you mean "why"?




Why do you take a position in defiance of established principles of item creation in D&D?



> What do YOU call them? What do you define as a "special effect"?




Something that isn't a common effect.



> I'm glad you're finally acknowledging that it's not my fault that I'm misinterpreting this. I'm a reasonably intelligent person; I have an English degree. I think I can read a section of text and puzzle out the meaning, but this one is, like you said, rather poorly worded and leads to silly rules arguments like this one.




Feel free to stop arguing any time.



> Let's trot out that paragraph again, shall we?




Wrong paragraph. I am referring to the various examples of improving items: the +1 sword made into the +2 vorpal sword, the boots of striding & springing combined with slippers of spider climb, the boots of S&S combined with +2 Dex, and so on. In all of these examples, no mention is made of prices differing according to which effect is put on first. Instead they all give a single price for an item, implying that order doesn't matter.

Further, given all the "behind the curtain" sidebars, you'd think that if they were going to overturn this fundamental principle of pricing, they would mention it.




> Any additional ability. Not "special effects" or "common effects".




Tch.



> *In most cases,* if the item is one that occupies a body slot, the cost of adding any additional ability...



Given the repercussions of interpreting that passage narrowly, it is obvious that such an interpretation is not the correct one.



> Here's the clincher, the part where it implies that order DOES matter. (BTW, I left out part of that; I'm surprised someone didn't call me on it.) If the new ability costs LESS than the existing item, you multiply the new ability by 1.5. If the new ability costs MORE than the existing item, then you add the new ability's cost and multiply the existing item's cost by 1.5.




IOW, order doesn't matter: the price is the same, regardless of which ability goes first. As you yourself conclude below.



> You know... once I wrote that out, and looked at it, it actually made sense. It's 1.5 times the lesser ability.




Yes, just like it's been since 3.5 came out, or 3E even if you go by the general principle (although back then it was x2 instead of x1.5). Isn't this fun?



> Why the **** couldn't they have said just that, instead of making some convoluted, obscure sentence that idiots like me are bound to misinterpret?




It's an intelligence test. You must be THIS TALL to comment on this issue.



> Didn't you hear, flagellation leads to enlightenment? You should try it some time. Worked for me.




Only because I deigned to educate you, my boy.


----------



## MerricB (Apr 5, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> Actually speaking of blinding, my copy has it in the list, but its not listed among the other weapon properties. A big typo indeed.




Blinding is an Armour property, not a weapon property. It's described on DMG 218, and it's in the list on page 283 of the MIC.

Cheers!


----------



## Kerrick (Apr 5, 2007)

> Given the repercussions of interpreting that passage narrowly, it is obvious that such an interpretation is not the correct one.



I don't know... We're not arguing about established principles of D&D item creation anymore - this is entirely new territory. 

This sentence: 



> In most cases, if the item is one that occupies a body slot...



Seems to apply to this one:



> This added cost doesn't necessarily apply when adding some common effects to existing items; see below.



Which directly refers to common effects. The only example they give is adding a +2 Dex bonus to an existing item, without a price hike. Fair enough, that part's spelled out pretty clearly. BUT, there's absolutely no evidence to show that you can add a "special effect" (read: an additional ability) to an item that has a common effect without a price hike. I suppose you could interpret it that way, based on the previous example (adding effects is always 1.5 times the lower-priced ability), and be technically correct, but I'm just opposed to the whole concept (which is not why I was arguing the point in the first place, but that's beside the point).



> I am referring to the various examples of improving items: the +1 sword made into the +2 vorpal sword, the boots of striding & springing combined with slippers of spider climb, the boots of S&S combined with +2 Dex, and so on. In all of these examples, no mention is made of prices differing according to which effect is put on first. Instead they all give a single price for an item, implying that order doesn't matter.



You're mixing metaphors. Improving items isn't the same as adding additional abilities - they use different pricing schemes. Additional abilities are 1.5 times the lower cost, and improved abilities are the higher minus the lower.



> Yes, just like it's been since 3.5 came out, or 3E even if you go by the general principle (although back then it was x2 instead of x1.5). Isn't this fun?



Wrong. If you look in your 3.5 DMG, it's 2 times the _higher_ cost. They DID change it in the MIC; they just didn't mention it in a sidebar for some reason, instead choosing to write it in obscure verbiage that a 10-year-old could have done better.



> It's an intelligence test. You must be THIS TALL to comment on this issue.



I suppose I asked for that one.



> Only because I deigned to educate you, my boy.



Pfft. You merely guided me on the path; I found enlightenment on my own.


----------



## hong (Apr 5, 2007)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> I don't know... We're not arguing about established principles of D&D item creation anymore - this is entirely new territory.




Nonsense. Just because YOU want it to be entirely new territory, for reasons that possibly make sense in that certain non-Euclidean way, does not mean anyone else has to feel the same.



> Which directly refers to common effects. The only example they give is adding a +2 Dex bonus to an existing item, without a price hike. Fair enough, that part's spelled out pretty clearly. BUT, there's absolutely no evidence to show that you can add a "special effect" (read: an additional ability) to an item that has a common effect without a price hike.




Of course there is, although I suppose a pedant with no substantive point to make could always choose to ignore it. The evidence is:

1) There are no corroborating statements to the effect that item prices depend on the order in which enchantments are added;

2) There are no items with multiple prices given;

3) There are no sidebars discussing what would be a major change to the item pricing guidelines;

4) Consequently, the algorithm for pricing items must be as I've outlined it.

Shall I explain it to you all over again?



> I suppose you could interpret it that way, based on the previous example (adding effects is always 1.5 times the lower-priced ability), and be technically correct,




Exactly.



> but I'm just opposed to the whole concept (which is not why I was arguing the point in the first place, but that's beside the point).




This isn't even cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's cutting off your nose to spite your nose.




> You're mixing metaphors.




Ah. This must be some new meaning of "metaphor" that I wasn't aware of before.



> Improving items isn't the same as adding additional abilities - they use different pricing schemes. Additional abilities are 1.5 times the lower cost, and improved abilities are the higher minus the lower.




Regardless of nitpicking by pedants with no substantive point to make, the item at the end of the process is more potent/useful than it was at the start, and thus it is "improved".



> Wrong. If you look in your 3.5 DMG, it's 2 times the _higher_ cost.




Chapter and verse, please.



> They DID change it in the MIC;




Chapter and verse, please.



> they just didn't mention it in a sidebar for some reason,




Possibly because they didn't change it.



> instead choosing to write it in obscure verbiage that a 10-year-old could have done better.




Bitter much?



> I suppose I asked for that one.




Yes, yes, you did.



> Pfft. You merely guided me on the path; I found enlightenment on my own.




Yes, yes, that's what they all say.


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 5, 2007)

Next person who posts something snarky gets a free vacation. Tune down the hostility and bickering, please; it isn't going to be tolerated.


----------



## Kerrick (Apr 6, 2007)

> Of course there is, although I suppose a pedant with no substantive point to make could always choose to ignore it.



I did have a substantive point to make; I just happened to be wrong.



> Nonsense. Just because YOU want it to be entirely new territory, for reasons that possibly make sense in that certain non-Euclidean way, does not mean anyone else has to feel the same.



Adding common effects (or ANY effects, for that matter) to an item without a price increase is something that's never been done before; hence "new territory".



> 1) There are no corroborating statements to the effect that item prices depend on the order in which enchantments are added;
> 
> 2) There are no items with multiple prices given;



Yes, wWe've already established that.



> 3) There are no sidebars discussing what would be a major change to the item pricing guidelines;
> 
> 4) Consequently, the algorithm for pricing items must be as I've outlined it.



I don't know why they didn't put it in a sidebar, but see below.



> Chapter and verse, please.



Table 7-33, p. 285. "Multiple different abilities: multiply higher item cost by 2."


----------

