how much would an item of powerful build cost 3.5

[kulosle]

So this is something my group has been wanting to figure out for a while. We couldn't find a pre-existing item that does it. We got into a discussion about whether or not it should cost as much as an item of continuous enlarge person. I think not, because the item doesnt give you reach. But a membet of my group thinks it should cost more cause you dobt suffer any of the penalties for being bigger.

Other relavent questions:
How much would an item of slight buold cost?
How much would an item cost if you could be treated 2 sizes larger?
An item that had both large build and slight build?
An item (cursed) that made you be cosidered to be a certain sized (fine?) all the time?

[Darrin]

We couldn't find a pre-existing item that does it.

The Ring of Reduction in Lords of Madness costs 20K. That's one complete size reduction, continuous effect. Presumably, a Ring of Non-Reduction that increases your size would probably cost the same 20K.

There are two other items that allow you to change size easily: Phylactery of Change (11200 GP, A&EG) gives you all-day polymorph up to 7HD, and Fleshshifter Armor (13160 GP, BoVD) gives you alter self at will.

And there's also the Strongarm Bracers (6000 GP, MIC) that offer the "wield a larger-sized weapon" effect but not any of the other size-related bonuses.

So... Powerful build isn't quite the same as being large, but I don't really see how it's an advantage over the disadvantages of being large. I'd probably put the price at the midway point between Strongarm Bracers and the Ring of Reduction: 13K.

How much would an item of slight buold cost?

I'm not really seeing much of an upside to slight build, but I guess it might be useful for larger creatures having trouble with narrow passages. I'm inclined to call it 13K, same for Powerful Build, but that seems high to me. 8-9K sounds about right.

How much would an item cost if you could be treated 2 sizes larger?

That's really going to throw the power balance out of whack. I'd say 100-150K.

An item that had both large build and slight build?

Uh... 9 + 13 = 22K?

An item (cursed) that made you be cosidered to be a certain sized (fine?) all the time?

Well... there are some return to nature shenanigans you can pull with half-giants. On the right chassis, though, being fine-sized would be a huge advantage (I'm looking at you, Hengeyokai Sparrow Warlock). I'm not sure I'd try to price such an item... it would have to be deployed very carefully against certain PCs that might find it on the humorous side of inconvenient.

[Silva Stormrage]

Well large size gives you reach so I think just powerful build is worse than large size. I would value it at around 15-20k though. It is about worth a good feat (Jotunbrud).

[kulosle]

Really, you think there should be such a large price gap from 1 size up to 2 sizes up?

[Zanos]

Really, you think there should be such a large price gap from 1 size up to 2 sizes up?

The cost of bonuses scale exponentially, and going from medium->large to medium->huge is double the bonuses.

That said, it's difficult for grapple/trip/etc. builds to compete with melee monsters at many points in the game due to the fact that monsters tend to have high natural strength scores, be huge or larger, or have some stupid racial ability that gives them +8 to grapple or lets them attempt a grapple after every attack. Based on that, I would give such an item a cap on maximum size(maybe huge), but not make it cost over 100k. After all, a level 7 psychic warrior could just manifest expansion and that doesn't make them OP.

[Firechanter]

I'd price it at around 9K, based on the aforementioned Strongarm Bracers and Fleshshifter Armour. PB is certainly better than just the Bracers, but it's definitely not as good as Alter Self at Will, so it should be considerably cheaper than that.

BTW, what player races are there that have Powerful Build, other than Goliath?

[Curmudgeon]

BTW, what player races are there that have Powerful Build, other than Goliath?

The Half-Giant also has Powerful Build, but doesn't get the Goliath exception for those Races of Stone feats for Large characters. Both of these are +1 LA races, and non-Humanoid so they don't qualify for the 1 racial HD Humanoid exchange for their first class level. So that's a 2 level-equivalent cost.

Getting Powerful Build other than by race also costs you 2 level-equivalent, and more: +2 LA and 1 feat, and still has drawbacks (reduction in either speed or DEX); see the Stonebone template (Dragon # 350, page 36).

Because we're talking at least 2 levels, an item which grants this ability, with no drawbacks, should cost about 120,000 gp.

[Fouredged Sword]

The "half giants as characters" overrules the standard rules for HD and class levels. A player who is a half giant has 1 LA and no RHD. It is worth 1 class level.

[Curmudgeon]

The "half giants as characters" overrules the standard rules for HD and class levels.

Exactly how does it do that? There's nothing in that section (Expanded Psionics Handbook, pages 201-202) which says anything about hit dice.

[Fax Celestis]

Exactly how does it do that? There's nothing in that section (Expanded Psionics Handbook, pages 201-202) which says anything about hit dice.

The "Half-Giants as Characters" section does not include a racial hit die line, unlike other creatures that have racial hit dice. Compare to Ogres as Characters:

Ogres As Characters
Ogre characters possess the following racial traits.

+10 Strength, -2 Dexterity, +4 Constitution, -4 Intelligence, -4 Charisma.
Large size. -1 penalty to Armor Class, -1 penalty on attack rolls, -4 penalty on Hide checks, +4 bonus on grapple checks, lifting and carrying limits double those of Medium characters.
Space/Reach: 10 feet/10 feet.
An ogre’s base land speed is 40 feet.
Darkvision out to 60 feet.
Racial Hit Dice: An ogre begins with four levels of giant, which provide 4d8 Hit Dice, a base attack bonus of +3, and base saving throw bonuses of Fort +4, Ref +1, and Will +1.
Racial Skills: An ogre’s giant levels give it skill points equal to 7 × (2 + Int modifier, minimum 1). Its class skills are Climb, Listen, and Spot.
Racial Feats: An ogre’s giant levels give it two feats.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: An ogre is automatically proficient with simple weapons, martial weapons, light and medium armor, and shields.
+5 natural armor bonus.
Automatic Languages: Common, Giant. Bonus Languages: Dwarven, Orc, Goblin, Terran.
Favored Class: Barbarian.
Level adjustment +2.

Half-Giants As Characters
Half-giant characters possess the following racial traits.

+2 Constitution, +2 Strength, -2 Dexterity.
Medium size.
Half-giant base land speed is 30 feet.
Low-light vision.
Naturally Psionic: Half-giants gain 2 bonus power points at 1st level, regardless of whether they choose a psionic class.
Fire Acclimated: Half-giants have a +2 racial bonus on saving throws against all fire spells and effects.
Powerful build (see above).
Special Attacks (see above): Psi-like abilities.
Automatic Language: Common. Bonus Language: Draconic, Giant, Gnoll, Ignan.
Favored Class: Psychic warrior.
Level adjustment: +1.

No RHD entry.

[Fouredged Sword]

"Half-giant characters possess the following racial traits."

This line is then followed by a number of lines detailing exactly what half giant characters start with as racial traits. Giant HD are not one of those traits. This specific list overrules the general rule.

[Flickerdart]

I don't know if this is an SRD goof or in the books as well, but even though the section is titled "humanoids and class levels" the word humanoids is never used again in that paragraph:

Creatures with 1 or less HD replace their monster levels with their character levels. The monster loses the attack bonus, saving throw bonuses, skills, and feats granted by its 1 monster HD and gains the attack bonus, save bonuses, skills, feats, and other class abilities of a 1st-level character of the appropriate class.

[Curmudgeon]

"Half-giant characters possess the following racial traits."

This line is then followed by a number of lines detailing exactly what half giant characters start with as racial traits. Giant HD are not one of those traits. This specific list overrules the general rule.

The lack of mention of a racial trait doesn't constitute a rule removing a type feature.

Features

A giant has the following features.

• 8-sided Hit Dice.

Every creature of every type starts with some number of racial HD; lack of HD means you have no hit points and are an object rather than a creature. The Humanoid type includes a rule that if you have exactly 1 HD you must exchange it when you acquire your first class level. The Giant type has no such rule.

[kulosle]

In the monster manual on page 293 it says "When adding class levels to a creature with 1 or less HD, you advance the creature like a character." My group always took this to mean you just dropped the hit die. Is this not the case?

Also both those races give plenty of other things besides Powerful Build. The question isn't how much for an item that makes you into a goliath, (all though that item cost way less than 200k.)

[Darrin]

In the monster manual on page 293 it says "When adding class levels to a creature with 1 or less HD, you advance the creature like a character." My group always took this to mean you just dropped the hit die. Is this not the case?

We've been arguing about this for the better part of a decade. I don't think there's really any definitive answer other than, "Whatever works best for your game."

[Zaq]

The lack of mention of a racial trait doesn't constitute a rule removing a type feature. Every creature of every type starts with some number of racial HD; lack of HD means you have no hit points and are an object rather than a creature. The Humanoid type includes a rule that if you have exactly 1 HD you must exchange it when you acquire your first class level. The Giant type has no such rule.

But objects do have HP. Where's the rule that says "no HP = object"?

[kulosle]

ah i see the confusion. On page 290 in a section called humanoids and class levels it says "Creatures with one or less HD replace their monster levels with class levels." This seems to mean all creatures, but the sections title is confusing. Well my group uses dropps it and that's all that matters as far as the question is concerned. I agree that the item should cost less than the alter self item. i'd be willing to pay 9k for a PB item.

[bekeleven]

Gloves of the Titan's Grip: 3/Day when you enter a grapple, automatically gain +8 to grapple for 7 rounds. 14k. 3/Day -> Use Activated brings price up to 23.3k. Bonus 8 -> 4 should divide price by 4 (bonus prices scale on square, so 16:64), so 5.8k for continuous +4/Grapple.
Strongarm Bracers: Wield weapons 1 SC larger. 6k.
Steadfast Boots: +4 defense vs. Bull Rush, Tripped, Overrun, plus extra benefits. 1.4k. Assume that the extra benefits are worth as much as getting +4 to offense with those same maneuvers.
Brawler's Guantlets: +2 on unarmed damage rolls (and grapple), swift, 3/D for 1R. 1k. Converting to continuous (5/3, 20/18, 4) and assuming both effects constitute half of the price (1/2), +2 to unarmed is worth 3.7k. That's about the same as +1 size category in most applications.

So with my hackey MIC estimation, powerful build is worth under 17k. But honestly I wouldn't pay that for it. I consider strongarm bracers overpriced, and fixing that would fix my total.

[Curmudgeon]

But objects do have HP. Where's the rule that says "no HP = object"?

That's a parsing problem. When I wrote "lack of HD means you have no hit points and are an object", that's the equivalent of saying:

• lack of HD means you are an object; and
• lack of HD means you have no hit points.

That's not the equivalent of saying "lack of HD means you have no hit points and consequently are an object".

[Flickerdart]

The lack of mention of a racial trait doesn't constitute a rule removing a type feature. Every creature of every type starts with some number of racial HD; lack of HD means you have no hit points and are an object rather than a creature. The Humanoid type includes a rule that if you have exactly 1 HD you must exchange it when you acquire your first class level. The Giant type has no such rule.

That would be convincing if the sentence didn't appear elsewhere as a general rule, which is does, having been quoted twice in the thread already.

[Curmudgeon]

That would be convincing if the sentence didn't appear elsewhere as a general rule, which is does, having been quoted twice in the thread already.

Oh, it's a general rule all right, but only for Humanoids. The rule appears in three places in Monster Manual:

• Humanoids and Class Levels in Improving Monsters (page 290)
• Humanoid section in Making Monsters (page 295)
• Humanoid Type definition in Glossary (page 310)

[Flickerdart]

Oh, it's a general rule all right, but only for Humanoids. The rule appears in three places in Monster Manual:

• Humanoids and Class Levels in Improving Monsters (page 290)
• Humanoid section in Making Monsters (page 295)
• Humanoid Type definition in Glossary (page 310)

Yeah, and then it makes reference to creatures and monsters. It's poor placement, but 3.5 is known for that.

[The Insanity]

Oh, it's a general rule all right, but only for Humanoids. The rule appears in three places in Monster Manual:

• Humanoids and Class Levels in Improving Monsters (page 290)
• Humanoid section in Making Monsters (page 295)
• Humanoid Type definition in Glossary (page 310)

Note that in Improving Monsters, under Class Levels, it says that "intelligent creatures that are reasonably humanoid in shape most commonly advance by adding class levels", so it's pretty safe to assume that later they mean that sentence, not the humanoid type, because then the rules would say "humanoid" and not "creature" or "monster". They only use a humanoid as a simple example. Besides, it could say "Vanilla Ice" instead of "Humanoid and Class Levels" and it wouldn't make a difference, because a chapter/header name isn't rules.

[Curmudgeon]

... so it's pretty safe to assume that later they mean that sentence, not the humanoid type ...

No, it's pretty much not safe to make assumptions where D&D rules are concerned.

Besides, it could say "Vanilla Ice" instead of "Humanoid and Class Levels" and it wouldn't make a difference, because a chapter/header name isn't rules.

You would first need to cite a rule which states this. (I don't know of any such rule, so it looks like your personal house rule rather than RAW.)

[Pan151]

they don't qualify for the 1 racial HD Humanoid exchange for their first class level.

The 1st HD for class exchange is not a humanoid-only thing. It is universal.

I mean, look at the examples for all the player-intended 1-HD races - some are humanoids, some outsiders, some fey, some plants, etc, and none of them retain their RHD.

[Curmudgeon]

The 1st HD for class exchange is not a humanoid-only thing. It is universal.

I mean, look at the examples for all the player-intended 1-HD races - some are humanoids, some outsiders, some fey, some plants, etc, and none of them retain their RHD.

No matter how numerous, those examples don't help your argument; they just constitute a disagreement between the written rule and the example creatures. The Primary Sources Errata Rule says that in the case of such disagreements, the primary source (actual rule) is correct. An example can't override the written rule; it takes an official errata file for that to change.

[Pan151]

No matter how numerous, those examples don't help your argument; they just constitute a disagreement between the written rule and the example creatures. The Primary Sources Errata Rule says that in the case of such disagreements, the primary source (actual rule) is correct. An example can't override the written rule; it takes an official errata file for that to change.

There's no rule disagreement in the first place.

The RAW says that all creatures with 1 HD replace their RHD with a class level.
The RAI implied by all example non-humanoid characters says that all creatures with 1 HD replace their RHD with a class level.

There is no rules disagreement. You are merely imagining one.

[nyjastul69]

There's no rule disagreement in the first place.

The RAW says that all creatures with 1 HD replace their RHD with a class level.
The RAI implied by all example non-humanoid characters says that all creatures with 1 HD replace their RHD with a class level.

There is no rules disagreement. You are merely imagining one.

The RAW says all creatures and monsters that are humanoids can exchange their first HD. Nowhere does it state this a general rule for all creatures. This rule only exists in relation to humanoids. Curmudgeon is correct.

[Pan151]

The RAW says all creatures and monsters that are humanoids can exchange their first HD. Nowhere does it state this a general rule for all creatures. This rule only exists in relation to humanoids. Curmudgeon is correct.

Creatures with 1 or less HD replace their monster levels with their character levels. The monster loses the attack bonus, saving throw bonuses, skills, and feats granted by its 1 monster HD and gains the attack bonus, save bonuses, skills, feats, and other class abilities of a 1st-level character of the appropriate class.

I see no mention of humanoid anywhere in the actual rule. The only place where "humanoid" is mentioned is in the header.

Thus, there are 2 distinct possibilities:

a) The rule applies only to humanoids, and the main body of the rule listed "creature" rather than "humanoid" by mistake.
b) The rule applies to all creatures with class levels, and the header refers to "humanoids" by mistake.

When a rule is ambiguous, the obvious thing to do is see how the official source applies it.

And all official 3.5 books take option (b), applying it to all 1 HD creatures regardless of type.

Now, unless you are seriously trying to argue that your interpretation of the rule is the correct one and that WotC applied the rule wrongly in ALL of their books, I think we're done here.

[nyjastul69]

I see no mention of humanoid anywhere in the actual rule. The only place where "humanoid" is mentioned is in the header.

Thus, there are 2 distinct possibilities:

a) The rule applies only to humanoids, and the main body of the rule listed "creature" rather than "humanoid" by mistake.
b) The rule applies to all creatures with class levels, and the header refers to "humanoids" by mistake.

When a rule is ambiguous, the obvious thing to do is see how the official source applies it.

And all official 3.5 books take option (b), applying it to all 1 HD creatures regardless of type.

Now, unless you are seriously trying to argue that your interpretation of the rule is the correct one and that WotC applied the rule wrongly in ALL of their books, I think we're done here.

Example characters aren't a very good source for adujicating rules applications, many are incorrect. You still haven't pointed me to a general rule quote. The rule in question is only in relation to a discussion of humanoids. Until you can quote a general rule, not specific to humanoids, I agree, we are done here.

ETA: I wholeheartedly agree that RAI is to replace the HD of any creature. It's how I rule it in the games I run. I just don't see RAW support for it.