Magic Item Pricing: Spell Completion, No Charges.

[Jack Haggerty]

While I (and others, apparently) are on the subject...

Most Wonderous Items are either Use-activated or Command Worded to use, and essentially have "unlimited" or #-per-day uses... No charges.

What if I wanted to make a Wonderous Item that was a Spell Completion or Spell Trigger activated item? The idea being that then, only characters with the particular spell in their spell list could use it.

Now, potions (use activated) cost twice as much as scrolls (spell completion). Would it be reasonable to charge half as much for a spell completion or spell trigger Wonderous Item than a Use-activated or Command Word one?

A Hand of Glory, for example, allows any character use Mage Hand at will for 1000 gp, becuase it is Use-activated. If it was Spell Completion, it would only be usable by Bards, Sorcerers and Wizards, would draw an AoO when used (or no AoO, if Spell Triggered), and would cost only 500 gp.

Does sound about right?

 

[Geoff Watson]

I'd say that the cost would only be slightly reduced, as the only people who would buy them are people who could use them.

Maybe a 10% reduction, if you're feeling generous.

Geoff.

 

[kreynolds]

A Hand of Glory, for example, allows any character use Mage Hand at will for 1000 gp, becuase it is Use-activated. If it was Spell Completion, it would only be usable by Bards, Sorcerers and Wizards, would draw an AoO when used (or no AoO, if Spell Triggered), and would cost only 500 gp.

The spell completion activation method would get you only 1 single use, so I don't think that would be a very worthwile magic item.

If the Hand of Glory were spell-trigger though, I would calculate it as twice the cost of the spell-trigger (50 charges) cost. So, I would use this formula: Spell Level x Caster Level x 1,500gp. Of course, I would no doubt adjust that final gold piece value in the formual depending upon the spell in question.

 

[dcollins]

What if I wanted to make a Wonderous Item that was a Spell Completion or Spell Trigger activated item? The idea being that then, only characters with the particular spell in their spell list could use it.

This is a pretty dicey proposal, since by the rules, those two activation techniques are by definition only used by non-Wondrous items with limited charges. (DMG p. 175: "Spell Completion: This is the activation method for scrolls"... "Spell Trigger:... (such as a wand or staff)").

The best pricing strategy, if you're comparing it to a hand of the mage anyway, is to use the model is via DMG p. 243 which suggests as a pricing factor: "Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Function... cuts the price by 30%".

If the item is basically a hand of the mage usable only by bards/sorcerers/wizards, then I'd recommend a price cut of (at most) 20% for a market value of 800 gp.

 

[Jack Haggerty]

Re: Re: Magic Item Pricing: Spell Completion, No Charges.

The spell completion activation method would get you only 1 single use...

Who says?

If the Hand of Glory were spell-trigger though, I would calculate it as twice the cost of the spell-trigger (50 charges) cost.

That's tricky, though... Wands get a "discount for producing charges in "bulk". A wand is 60% the cost per charge as a similar spell made into a scroll.

Though the guideline ends up with a result (750 gp for a 0-level spell) about the same as Collin's suggestion below...

This is a pretty dicey proposal, since by the rules, those two activation techniques are by definition only used by non-Wondrous items with limited charges. (DMG p. 175: "Spell Completion: This is the activation method for scrolls"... "Spell Trigger:... (such as a wand or staff)").

Hrm... Just because it is says that's the activation method for scrolls, doesn't mean that it's ONLY the activation method for scrolls.

My idea was to make a pair of gloves that allow the spellcaster to cast a particular spell essentially at will. But they must now the spell to activate it... they must go through the gestures and incantations, but the glove supplies the spell.

Or, I was thinking about creating a "Wizard's Hat" that would allow the caster to use several Cantrips at will, but only as Spell Trigger or Spell Completion activations.

The best pricing strategy, if you're comparing it to a hand of the mage anyway, is to use the model is via DMG p. 243 which suggests as a pricing factor: "Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Function... cuts the price by 30%".

If the item is basically a hand of the mage usable only by bards/sorcerers/wizards, then I'd recommend a price cut of (at most) 20% for a market value of 800 gp.

That is a good idea, though... I must have missed that sidebar.

 

[KarinsDad]

Re: Re: Magic Item Pricing: Spell Completion, No Charges.

This is a pretty dicey proposal, since by the rules, those two activation techniques are by definition only used by non-Wondrous items with limited charges. (DMG p. 175: "Spell Completion: This is the activation method for scrolls"... "Spell Trigger:... (such as a wand or staff)").

This is blatantly false.

Look up Caster's Shield to find a spell completion item which is not a scroll.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Magic Item Pricing: Spell Completion, No Charges.

Who says?

The DMG, to an extent. There is only one formula for spell-completion items and it is single use. If you wanna make a new formula, that's fine. I was just pointing out that there wasn't one for what you wanted to do.

 

[dcollins]

Re: Re: Re: Magic Item Pricing: Spell Completion, No Charges.

Look up Caster's Shield to find a spell completion item which is not a scroll.

I disagree: the caster's shield simply includes a scroll on it. One must scribe the scroll, use the feat of Scribe Scroll, pay the normal experience and component costs, and get only one casting out of it. As the description says, it is in all ways "as on a scroll".

In fact, you wouldn't be able tell that this item uses spell completion (it doesn't say that in the description) except for the fact that it works just like a scroll in every way.

 

[KarinsDad]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Magic Item Pricing: Spell Completion, No Charges.

I disagree: the caster's shield simply includes a scroll on it. One must scribe the scroll, use the feat of Scribe Scroll, pay the normal experience and component costs, and get only one casting out of it. As the description says, it is in all ways "as on a scroll".

"This +1 small wooden shield has a small leather strip on the back on which a spellcaster can scribe a single spell as on a scroll."

It doesn't say that it is a scroll that can be scribed on, it says that it is a leather strip that can be scribed as on a scroll.

They explicitly state that this is not a scroll (as on a scroll states this), rather a magical item that can be used that way with this sentence.

In order to scribe on it, you would still need the Scribe Scroll feat. The item does not state that it explicitly gives you that ability.

Just like this item does not give you Shield Proficiency.

In fact, you wouldn't be able tell that this item uses spell completion (it doesn't say that in the description) except for the fact that it works just like a scroll in every way.

Exactly. It works like a scroll, but isn't a scroll. It's a shield.

Hence, my original statement stands. This is a Spell Completion item since it uses the Scribe Scroll techniques.

If it used some technique other than the one implied, wouldn't it have stated so?

The designer's intent here is clear. This is not really ambiguous. It merely disputes your earlier implication that Spell Completion items must be scrolls. The designer could have stated that it is a bunch of runes written around the edge of the shield as opposed to a leather strip and it wouldn't have mattered. The game mechanics on how to scribe it and use it would not have changed.

Ditto for scribed spells on a sword, ring, armor, cloak, whatever. Nothing in the rules prohibit combining multiple magic activation types in any sort of item.

 

[dcollins]

In the context of this thread, the original poster was considering inventing a spell completion item which was: (a) a Wondrous Item, (b) required no scribing of spells, (c) required no Scribe Scroll feat, and (d) allowed unlimited charges.

That's quite obviously against the intent of the spell completion methodology. The example of the caster's shield only serves to reinforce that the only way to be a spell completion item is for the item to work like a scroll in all ways.