The Complete Cost Reduction Handbook by Bastian with PlzBreakMyCampaign's help

[Bastian]

The LE medicant scheme seems to be the best option.  Get good press, get a ton of xp.

How does that work?

Is it the Ambrosia farm, but with Liquid Pain(which seems expensive with its 64k gp cost/target)?

Step 1) Set up free hospitals
Step 2) Extract liquid pain from people suffering diseases (they're acceptable targets).  Magic trap or spell turret or something
Step 3) Use some sort of magic trap of cure disease or something.
Step 4) Undercut all the good churches
Step 5) Drive all other medical services out of business.  You are now necessary to scoiety.

Can I put that in the guide? I'll credit you of course.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

I just expanded upon an idea I saw a while ago on 339, but sure.

[Bastian]

I just expanded upon an idea I saw a while ago on 339, but sure.

Thanks.

I just added it along with a few other corrections.

[Bastian]

Corrected the formatting PlzBreakMyCampaign had destroyed. This time with tables.

Also corrected PlzBreakMyCampaign's lack of research concerning Words of Creation, please don't correct me if you didn't bother to check the source. Fixed other minor problems.

[Bastian]

Changed Quill of Scribing to be blue since by RAW it can be used along with a Dedicated Wright.

[Akalsaris]

And while out drinking!

[Felix Underwood]

Thanks guys, this is a good resource.

Bastian, I skimmed through your Preliminary Guide to see if anyone discussed your take on combining multiple discounts.

I don't agree that they are multiplied like concealment.  Concealment math works the way it does because it's based on probability.  There is no probability with magic item creation.

To use the same numbers you provided for the two 25% discounts as an example (and forgetting the actual rules) if you had a 25% miss chance for displacment and a 25% miss chance for cover we'd get the following:

   Only a 75% chance to be hit the spot where you were displaced from.
        [not A] P(A') = 1-P(A)

   Only a 75% chance to hit a spot with concealment.
        [not A] P(A') = 1-P(A)

   Provides a 56.25% chance to hit.
        [A and B]  P(A)xP(B)

Converting that back to a miss chance gives us the 43.75%... but that's a probability.  Out of infinite attacks 43.75% will probably miss you.

Magic item creation is finite.  When you make a wand, you will have to spend a specific amount of gold.  There's no roll of the dice, with the hopes that it only costs gold a percentage of the time.

I believe the cost reductions all apply to the Market Value.  If it gets out of hand, IMHO it's up to the DM to step up and do his/her job and arbitrate.

[Bastian]

Thanks guys, this is a good resource.

Bastian, I skimmed through your Preliminary Guide to see if anyone discussed your take on combining multiple discounts.

I don't agree that they are multiplied like concealment.  Concealment math works the way it does because it's based on probability.  There is no probability with magic item creation.

To use the same numbers you provided for the two 25% discounts as an example (and forgetting the actual rules) if you had a 25% miss chance for displacment and a 25% miss chance for cover we'd get the following:

   Only a 75% chance to be hit the spot where you were displaced from.
        [not A] P(A') = 1-P(A)

   Only a 75% chance to hit a spot with concealment.
        [not A] P(A') = 1-P(A)

   Provides a 56.25% chance to hit.
        [A and B]  P(A)xP(B)

Converting that back to a miss chance gives us the 43.75%... but that's a probability.  Out of infinite attacks 43.75% will probably miss you.

Magic item creation is finite.  When you make a wand, you will have to spend a specific amount of gold.  There's no roll of the dice, with the hopes that it only costs gold a percentage of the time.

I believe the cost reductions all apply to the Market Value.  If it gets out of hand, IMHO it's up to the DM to step up and do his/her job and arbitrate.

This is the part where I tell you that the PHB says your wrong. Since cost is a real world value you apply real world math to it and when you have two 50% off coupons you do not get the item for free. Seriously, check pg 304.

Edit: Added that info to the Handbook.

[Felix Underwood]

I have to conceed this one to you, I tried researching examples but the internet hates me at the moment.  I'm really not motivated to spend any more time searching. 

[Bastian]

I have to conceed this one to you, I tried researching examples but the internet hates me at the moment.  I'm really not motivated to spend any more time searching. 

Unless those alleged examples were in Core, the Player's Handbook would override them anyways.

[Felix Underwood]

Well, some from the books and some from real-world applications.

I couldn't remember where the rule was about being able to chose the order in which bonuses/multipliers were applied.

I was gonna try to tie a correlation between that and the Coupon Policy for some stores / disclaimer on some store coupons  "..discount applies after any applicable sale price".

I was under the impression that 10% Store Sale + 10% Store Coupon was this:

     cost = [retail - (10% retail Store Sale)] - (10% retail Store Coupon) = 19% savings

...while the following was stackable for Store Coupons + Manufacturer's Coupons:

     cost = retail - (10% retail Store Coupon) - (10% retail Manufacturer's Coupon) = 20% savings

I found it funny that non-gaming folks actually used the word "stackable".

This is probably one of the worst arguments I've made for D&D, but hey, at least I tried right?   

The reason it doesn't inspire much confidence in me, is I can't find any Manufacturer's Coupons that are variable; they're usually a fixed amount like $1 off.

We can reverse engineer the percent savings, but I'm not actually buying that arguement myself.

In the case of a $1 off store coupon and a $1 off manufacturer's coupon used for a $10 item, they both reduce the cost by 10%, and together save the savy shopper 20%.

   ...yeah, I'm not buying it either.

The other arguement was the for order of effects.  In the example in the PHB, there is a progression of events; step 1 large size then step 2 turn to stone.  The same applies for applying a store coupon 'after' a store sale price is applied.  I was thinking that the cost reducing feats might look different if they are seen as simultaneously applied.

     Instead of:  cost = [market - (market x 0.5)] - (market x 0.75) = market x 37.5%

     I was thinking along the lines of:  cost = market - (market x 0.5) - (market x 0.25) = market x 25%


The really sad thing is, when I actually did this math for the background of an NPC in my campaign years ago, I used the same math you did.  I just multiplied all the modifiers together (0.5 x 0.25 x 0.25 x... etc).  I had forgotten all about it. 

I have a NPC hordificer that mass produced rudimentary intelligent effigies kinda like that proposed in the neighboring thread.  I've followed snizor's Mechonomicon thread and participated in the Mr. Robot thread (I'm Ninja1 on 339).  I totally forgot about the math involved.

Thanks for going easy on me and my addled mind.

[Akalsaris]

Did WoTC ever make it clear if you can stack on multiple class, alignment, and skill requirements?  So 30% and 30% and 10% off for my NG Wizard Headband of +6 Int that requires 10 ranks in Spellcraft, changing it from 36k to...something considerably lower that would require me to do some math?

Better yet, are there published items that do this and also have a price tag?  I can't even think of any items that actually require skill ranks, for that matter.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Did WoTC ever make it clear if you can stack on multiple class, alignment, and skill requirements?  So 30% and 30% and 10% off for my NG Wizard Headband of +6 Int that requires 10 ranks in Spellcraft, changing it from 36k to...something considerably lower that would require me to do some math?

Better yet, are there published items that do this and also have a price tag?  I can't even think of any items that actually require skill ranks, for that matter.

weapons of legacy, but they're special.

[Bastian]

Did WoTC ever make it clear if you can stack on multiple class, alignment, and skill requirements?  So 30% and 30% and 10% off for my NG Wizard Headband of +6 Int that requires 10 ranks in Spellcraft, changing it from 36k to...something considerably lower that would require me to do some math?

Better yet, are there published items that do this and also have a price tag?  I can't even think of any items that actually require skill ranks, for that matter.

I'm pretty sure it falls under the similar sources don't stack unless otherwise specified clause. Beyond that they haven't said anything on it except for the already mentioned Weapons of Legacy.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Don't think spell clock actually works like that.

Seems more like it's an expanded version of spell storing, which is borne out by having no price variance based upon the spell.


Anyway, some mildly useful non-spell-duplicating potions (interesting since they're so weird) from Kingdoms of Kalamar - Player's guide

Potion of blood: 750 gp market
- You are now considered to be a of a different race (picked when crafted) for using/being effected by magical items.  Like, an orc which drinks the potion will count as an elf, but not an orc for bane weapons.  Useful stuff (spellweaver discs, anyone?)

Potion of Wind: 250 gp market
+2 dex, +2 dodge to AC, +2 resistance to gas/air spells for d6 minutes. 

[CantripN]

What's the duration on the Potion of Blood? Is it permanent? I'd like to count as a True Dragon as a Dragonfire Adept Kobold without any arguments on the silliness of Kobolds already being True Dragons.

[Littha]

only for magical items though...

[CantripN]

only for magical items though...

I'd use it for the Crown of the North Winds. The rest doesn't matter here.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Permanent.  A new potion will override an old one.

[Bastian]

Don't think spell clock actually works like that.

Seems more like it's an expanded version of spell storing, which is borne out by having no price variance based upon the spell.

The text seems to indicate that no spell needs to be cast into it. They can either be set to go off in a certain amount of time or they can regularly. There is nothing there that indicates spells need to be cast into them.