Monthly Archives: April, 2016

Z-A Challenge 2016 Index

A-Z 2016 "Z"Buffering made the challenge much easier this year. I had time to prepare three or four posts before April 1, and while I never got that far ahead again, it was enough that I was able to stay on time. I think almost always I had at least one post for the day up by 9:00 PM the night before (Pacific time; midnight Eastern time). This was mostly because I get up early and wanted to make sure they were live before I went to bed.

Not that I often get to bed by 9:00 PM, but that was the thought.

Slightly more posts than previous years (34 this year, 28 last year and 32 the year before). About 36,583 words, a little lower than a couple years ago (about 38,000), somewhat more than last year.

The most common topic in this challenge was ‘graded items’, magic items with multiple powers assigned at different grades (measures of power). I suspect that after review and revision the topic will form the core of another book. Like Polyhedral Pantheons there’s a good chance a small part of the book will explain the processes and much more of the book will be spent on gameable examples. Somewhat to my surprise I didn’t actually create many such examples during the challenge — they’re quick and easy, but I had bigger thoughts to write about.

Another major topic this time around was some cartography techniques regarding how to draw mountains. Rounding the list out were a few posts about encounter design and development, and the data capture and encoding process I use in creating the Echelon Reference Series (and how I think I’ll be doing it over, better… again).

A pretty satisfying run this year. Buffering made a huge difference, even being a single day ahead gave me some grace when I was pressed for time. Having two evenings a week consumed by judo makes this pretty important.

Okay, enough A-Z Challenge for this year, time to get back to work.

Date Letter Words Title
2016-04-30 Z 552 Z-A Challenge 2016 Index
2016-04-29 Y 1,153 Yet More Reorganization Notes
Y 1,288 Yet Another Grand Reorganization
2016-04-28 X 680 Exotic… No, Esoteric Draconic Bloodlines
X 389 XML Workflow, A New Direction
2016-04-27 W 2,133 Weapons and Armor made of ‘Special Materials’
2016-04-26 V 1,099 Variation: Graded Item Sets
2016-04-25 U 1,100 Umbral Mail
U 963 Unchained Skill Unlocks for Echelon
2016-04-23 T 1,333 Touching up the Mountain Colors
T 348 Thinking Again About the Price of Graded Spell Trigger Items
2016-04-22 S 1,120 Several Mountain Ranges Together
2016-04-21 R 1,195 Revisiting the Mountain Tutorial, Drawing the Initial Landform
2016-04-20 Q 1,396 Quirk, Flaw, Curse: What’s the Difference?
2016-04-19 P 1,159 Pushing Your Luck: Enchantment Gone Wrong
2016-04-18 posted midday Sunday because it was part of a conversation online
2016-04-17 O 3,002 On Mapping Mountains, Using a Few Simple Tricks
2016-04-16 N 841 New Uses for Unchained Item Qualities
2016-04-15 M 296 Metamagic Feats in Graded Wands and Staves
M 296 Midpoint Check-In
2016-04-14 L 457 Legendary/Spontaneous Graded Items, Made Simpler
L 2,096 Legendary/Spontaneous Graded Items
2016-04-13 K 767 “Kill Everything”: Making That Plan B
2016-04-12 J 2,416 JRPG-Inspired Encounter Design
2016-04-11 I 2,055 Improving Encounter Economy and Design
2016-04-09 H 1,157 Hammer Time! Polyhedral Graded Weapons and Armor
2016-04-08 G 940 Graded Weapons and Armor
2016-04-07 F 1,317 Forging Graded Items
F 62 Fey Bloodlines
2016-04-06 E 1,789 Exploring Multiple Charge Casting for Graded Items
2016-04-05 D 845 Determining Market Price of Graded Staves and Wands
2016-04-04 C 907 Crafting Graded Staves
C 718 Crafted Graded Wands
2016-04-02 B 198 Blood of Dragons? In My Veins? It’s More Common Than You Think
2016-04-01 A 466 Assigning Graded Abilities
Total 36,583

Yet More Reorganization Notes

A-Z 2016 "Y"I had time to think about this some more on my bus ride home. And even take notes, though that’s a bit of a challenge (I hate writing in a moving vehicle).

It appears I was only mostly right in what I had planned. I was having difficulty reconciling ‘data type’ and ‘data object’ in some cases. For instance, ‘rage power’ is a class feature, cool… but it can also be a data type. There are literally hundreds of rage powers. I know. I counted.

Turns out a solution is pretty simple. Time for some data modeling.

Data Dictionary

Good data projects really should have a data dictionary. I’ve worked (been stuck with) too many that don’t, so I’m starting one now.

Some of the names are subject to change, but I describe the purpose of the various types below.

Data Object

This is the core element of the entire system. Almost everything I care about is a data object: feats, spells, skills, monsters, everything. A data object has:

  • attributes, meta-information about the object that describe how the object is to be treated. Most data objects have default values for the attributes.
    • one of the common attributes is ‘parent’, indicating the data object this is an example of (“Rage Power” has an parent of “Class Feature”). This will often be set more or less implicitly by a new object being subordinate to a data object or data type. “Rage Power” is defined inside “Class Feature”; I can set it explicitly but don’t need to.
    • another attribute indicates that the data object can be used as a data type. For instance, “Class Feature” might be a data object (that probably never gets printed, oh well) marked “data-type=’class-feature'”. “Rage Power” is a class feature that might be marked “data-type=’rage-power'”. When I want, I can use a ‘rage power’ data type marker and all data objects under it are marked as being rage powers.
    • another attribute indicates ‘index type’, how to mark objects of this type when they get indexed. “Rage Power” is a class feature, and is indexed as “Rage Power (class feature)”, while “Animal Fury” gets indexed as “Animal Fury (rage power)”.
  • stat block (often empty): spells and monsters are examples here, but even feats can be said to have a stat block (type, prerequisites, type, and minimum level). May or may not be rendered as an actual stat block.
  • content: block text, tables, lists, etc., and may have sections and subobjects.

Data Type

Data type is actually much smaller and simpler than I’d anticipated. It’s basically a marker to show that the objects ‘inside it’ are of a particular type. Importantly, though:

  • the data type markers are never printed, they exist only in data.
  • there is a hierarchy to the data type Word styles, but only so they can be nested within other things (a bloodline has bloodline powers; structurally the data file might have
  • Bloodline [data type]
    • Draconic [‘bloodline’ data object]
      • statblock (bloodline skill, list of bloodline feats, list of bloodline spells, etc.)
      • content
      • Bloodline Powers [section heading]
        • Bloodline Power [data type]
          • Claws [‘bloodline power’ data object]
            • statblock
            • content
          • Dragon Resistances [‘bloodline power’ data object]
            • statblock
            • content
          • Breath Weapon [‘bloodline power’ data object]
            • statblock (save DC)
            • content
          • Wings [‘bloodline power’ data object]
            • statblock
            • content
          • Power of Wyrms [‘bloodline power’ data object]
            • statblock
            • content
  • while there is a hierarchy to the Word styles used, it does not reflect on the data hierarchy. “Rage Power” and “Bloodline Power” are both data types, even though “Bloodline Power” is typically used inside a “Bloodline” (as shown above). There is really no fixed hierarchy to the objects, though there is to the data types. If it turns out convenient to have a “Magic Item” inside a “Monster” (not common, but not unheard of) you can do it.
    • Word style hierarchy probably goes
      • data type 1 >
      • data object 1 >
      • data section 1 >
      • data type 2 >
      • data object 2 >
      • data section 2 >
      • data type 3 >
      • data object 3 >
      • data section 3
    • If I somehow really need more levels (class -> class feature -> class subfeature -> class subfeature power: sorcerer -> bloodline -> draconic bloodline -> claws) I’m probably making it difficult for myself. The ‘bloodline class feature’ can stay here (it identifies that the class has that feature), but the bloodline definitions can themselves be higher-level objects.
    • It occurs to me that this even lets me have objects that are children of the same kind of object. For instance, ‘monster group’ and “magic item group” can now be nested. “Dragon” > “Chromatic Dragon” can now work, as can “Rod” and “Metamagic Rod” or “Wondrous Item” > “Figurine of Wondrous Power”.


I have a practice of indexing the game content pretty aggressively. I can include indexing rules in the data objects so that when they are referenced as types the objects can be indexed the way I want. This definitely includes the type markers I have in the index, but can also include hierarchy displayed in the index.

I expect that I will be able to create indexes something like:

  • Affliction
    • Curse, see Curse (affliction)
    • Disease, see Disease (affliction)
    • Poison, see Poison (affliction)
  • Bloodline (class feature)
    • Draconic
    • Elemental
    • Fey
    • Undead
  • Claws (bloodline power)
  • Domain (class feature)
    • Air
    • Death
    • Earth
    • Fire
  • Draconic (bloodline)
  • Earth (domain)
  • Electricity Resistance (domain power)
  • Elemental (bloodline)
  • Fey (bloodline)
  • Lightning Arc (domain power)
  • Undead (bloodline)

Parts of this will be pretty easy, a few might be a bit tricky… but I’ve solved harder problems.


The semi-arbitrary/semi-abstract nature of the data structure also makes it so I can give each object a unique identifier, as long as the object is defined in basically the same way twice.

Data objects have two identifiers. The first is the group-id and consists of the type and name (modified). The “Rage Power” class feature has group-id=”class-feature.rage-power”. Some (parent) data types can be marked to be appended to the end of their children. For instance, while “Rage Power” has group-id=”class-feature.rage-power”, when described in the barbarian class (“Class” data type says “append to children’s IDs”) that object has id=”class-feature.rage-power.barbarian”.

The dual IDs let me group the objects by group-id (they are the same type and same name, and therefore equivalent for search purposes) while keeping the individual instances separate. This is important as there is more overlap, because I can then refine the data: I can have a single master definition of “Uncanny Dodge” that explains what it does, and the class-specific entry is reduced to a note saying when that class gains access to it.

Closing Comments

Didn’t plan to write this tonight, already had a “Y Day” post (and we were supposed to go judo but I’m having vehicle problems… again). I had some notes scribbled on the bus and I thought I’d try to get them into more readable form.

Strangely enough, I didn’t actually look at them. It seems the act of writing them was sufficient to cement them in my mind for later. Which is good, because I can’t read the damn things.

Yet Another Grand Reorganization

A-Z 2016 "Y"One of the hazards of being a data geek, and good at it, is that over time you become better at it. You find better ways to do things.

Also, the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game has become progressively more complex, both from player perspective (hence the Echelon Reference Series) and particularly from a data modeling perspective.

It’s time for me to fall back and regroup, reorganize how I’m capturing the data. The workflow changes somewhat, but more importantly the data and file management changes.

Existing Data Models

Today, each source is captured more or less exactly as published. Each Word file represents (usually) one source, complete with document structure (book, part, chapter, section, subsection, etc.) and game element structure (each game element is a major element, minor element, subelement, etc., and there are divisions within them such as for a bloodline’s bloodline powers).

Word produces relatively flat, unhierarchical files. Whether converted to HTML or converted to XML, the document structure basically lacks hierarchy. For instance, conceptually a book’s structure has chapters, and a chapter may have sections. That is, there is an implied hierarchy. In the document files, though, rather than

  • chapter
    • paragraph
    • paragraph
    • section
      • paragraph
      • table
        • table rows
      • paragraph
    • section
      • paragraph

you’ll see

  • chapter
  • paragraph
  • paragraph
  • section
  • paragraph
  • table
    • table rows
  • paragraph
  • section
  • paragraph

There are tricks, tools, and techniques for dealing with these, and I’ve gotten good at them. However, the process ultimately generates some eighteen levels of grouping (7 for document structure and 11 for data). In many cases I need to infer from element ancestry what I’m looking at. That is, I might have a “class-feature” called “domain”. Each “class-subfeature” is an instance of a domain (“Air”, “War”, etc.). The “class-subsubfeature” in that is a domain power… but it’s up to me, in my code, to recognize that.

Do you have any idea how many class features exhibit complicated internal structure like this?

New Data Models

I’m splitting the files. Data will all go into one set of files, and ‘document content’ will go into another set of files. I have found in my preliminary experiments that the ‘documents’ change remarkably little after initial capture, but the data elements get tweaked and massaged quite a bit.

Sometimes the purely document content is not Open Game Content (OGC), or is outright Product Identity (PI). I capture it mostly so I can reproduce the original document formatted to my taste (easier for me to read; so many publishers use hard to read fonts, for example), partly so I can view the game elements in situ so I have better context for examining them later, and frankly because, well, I’m a data geek and I like things to be complete. The PI and other non-OGC never gets republished.

Document Files

The document files are pretty straightforward. They follow normal document structure conventions (chapters, sections, etc.). They also can have “include commands” that identify game elements to be added to the document at that point when rendered.

When I captured the text of Pathfinder® Roleplaying Game: Ultimate Combat™ I originally reproduced the document structure, marking up the feats so they could be automatically extracted. Now I would create a data file for the feats, and the “Feats chapter” is reduced to introductory text and a series of “include these feats” instructions.

This gives me much more control than I had before. It also significantly reduces the size of the files I work with, which makes my job much easier.

Data Files

The data files are even simpler. Most game elements have a very similar structure, and the major difference is how they are applied.

  • Element name
    • Summary/statblock information (includes prereqs)
    • Descriptive text
    • Subelements (repeatable… and have the same structure as the parent)

Right now I define new Word styles for the various element types… but structurally they almost all boil down to the same basic structure. There are exceptions, but probably 80% or more of the game elements I deal with fall into this structure.

Instead, I’m going to rely more on metadata to identify what a particular element is. The metadata type will have a definition that is shared when needed, but otherwise will be used just by name. That is,

  • “Feat” [data type marker]
    • “Dodge” [data element]
      • prerequisites Dex 13
      • benefit lorem ipsum
    • “Mobility” [data element]
      • prerequisites Dex 13, Dodge feat
      • benefit lorem ipsum

(I spelled out ‘Dodge feat’, but given just a name the parser can usually find what it’s after… but ‘Dodge feat’ is explicit and resolves ambiguous cases).

Ultimately I end up with data objects something like

<d20:object class="feat" name="Dodge">
    <d20:prereq refid="score.dexterity" refclass="score" value="13" />
  <!-- content elided -->

<d20:object class="feat" name="Mobility">
    <d20:prereq refid="score.dexterity" refclass="score" value="13" />
    <d20:prereq refid="" refclass="feat" />
  <!-- content elided -->

Feats, most class features, and so on are generally presented in pretty much the same way. There are exceptions, of course, but I can now focus on handling them differently at need rather than having to lay out each data type explicitly.

It can be more complicated, but in many ways it isn’t. For Polyhedral Pantheons I might have something like

  • Deity [base data type]
  • Shu-shi [parent=Deity]
  • Jixiang Shen [parent=Shu-Shi Deity]
  • Zhengchang Shen [parent=Shu-Shi Deity]
  • Bukeishiyi Shen [parent=Shu-Shi Deity]
  • Goblin [parent=Deity]
  • Vorubec [parent=Goblin Deity]
  • Jhesiri [parent=Goblin Deity]
  • Kouzelnik [parent=Goblin Deity]


  • Jixiang Shen [data type]
    • Huanghou
    • Xingyun
    • Xiao Ling
    • Chengshi
    • Zhongli
    • Jingcai

Because I defined the data types as I did, I can traverse the relationships a couple ways. If I need to, I can determine that Huanghou (empress of heaven) is a Jixiang Shen (auspicious deity), a Shu-shi Deity, and a Deity. This gives me quite a bit of control over the formatting (default ‘game object’ formatting? more specific ‘deity’ formatting?), and even the indexing. The index might include

  • Deity
    •  Shu-shi
      • Jixiang Shen
        • Chengshi
        • Huanghou
        • Jingcai
        • Xiao Ling
        • Xingyun
        • Zhongli
  • Huanghou (shu-shi deity)

(because I decided I only wanted to go as far as the pantheon, not the subpantheon, here… custom indexing rule)

Closing Comments

My existing file and data structure has evolved over time to the point it has become hard to use. Splitting the files into “document content” and “game data content” lets me offload a lot of the more static content (document) and focus on the more often edited content (game data). It makes it easier to exclude the bits I mostly don’t care about most of the time (I don’t have to load the document content into my data store, where it gets repeatedly loaded and processed later) while keeping them available for later if I find I want them. This should speed up capture, editing, and processing.

Abstracting the data lets me rely more on the common aspects of the data. Feats, spells, and deities can all be structurally quite similar: name, statblock, text, done. I can start from there and refine as needed, rather than the current model that requires that I get detailed early, and find that I have many objects that are structurally the same.

This will let me do the RAF (Rough and Fast) versions of new data… well, rougher and faster. It will also let me focus my effort on the more complex cases where I want to know more about the game object. Spells can be structurally similar to other blockish game objects, but I can gain quite a bit by parsing further. Similarly, I know the “Domains” field of a deity definition will contain references to domains (object of type ‘domain’), so if I put just a little more effort into it I can parse and extract that information… let me both index the domain reference, and even update the domain object by adding a “Deities” line identifying the deities who have that domain.

I… did say I’m a data geek, right?

Exotic… No, Esoteric Draconic Bloodlines

A-Z 2016 "X"‘X Day’ is always difficult in the A-Z Challenge. So few words actually start with ‘X’.

I was going to write about how I was going to add esoteric draconic bloodlines to Draconic Bloodlines, since I deliberately excluded them when I released the book. I even started drafting that post, but when I started examining things more closely I realized my original reasons for excluding them stand.

The esoteric dragons are too different from the other dragon families, and creating bloodlines for them the same way would involve me picking things without enough knowledge to make good decisions. The esoteric dragons often have many spells (in a couple of cases seven or eight), and trimming that down requires me to choose from among them. I’ll have to come back after I’ve had a chance to read more about occult magic and internalize it somewhat.

That said, I now see four ways forward, where previously I’d seen one.

Ways to Include Esoteric Draconic Bloodlines

The primary stumbling block here is that almost all dragons cast spells as sorcerers, except the esoteric dragons. Esoteric dragons cast occult spells as psychics. I present them below, in approximate order of deviation from plan.

Steal From the Psychic Bloodline

The psychic bloodline’s bloodline arcana says

Your sorcerer spells and spell-like abilities count as psychic instead of arcane. You use thought and emotion components instead of verbal and somatic components when casting your spells.

In principle that arcana pretty much solves the “sorcerer magic vs psychic magic” disconnect, but it seems incomplete. I’d probably want to incorporate some of the bonus spells, bonus feats, and bloodline powers (at least one) to make the bloodline ‘more psychic’. I thought I might find sufficient overlap in the dragon special abilities to handle some of the ‘psychic bloodline powers’, but after reading them I don’t think so. There are some nifty abilities, though.

Create a Sorcerer Archetype

This honestly was my first intended approach, and went beyond what I was prepared to do when I considered it. Changing the sorcerer’s spell casting is, after all, a pretty fundamental shift. This would give me the opportunity to tweak more of the class features so things would fit properly. This is probably my favored approach right now, but again I’ll need to do some more research.

Create a Draconic Sorcerer Prestige Class

In discussion online it was suggested that a prestige class could solve the problem. I usually wouldn’t agree, I’m not a big fan of prestige classes to solve mechanical problems (I do like them as campaign elements — actual “prestige” classes), but in this case it could work. If a sorcerer starts with the core draconic bloodline, a prestige class could allow the sorcerer to shift to a more specific draconic bloodline, or even add it altogether. There would probably have to be some kind of additional cost or change to class features… a prestige class like this is something like a late-added archetype, I suppose.

Backup plan, definitely behind the archetype and possibly even behind the psychic bloodline.

Make This a Psychic Discipline

Perhaps I’m going about this the wrong way entirely. Esoteric dragons, unlike the other dragons, cast as psychics rather than sorcerers. Maybe there should instead be a ‘draconic’ psychic discipline that can be specialized.

Right now I’m leaning toward this as my favored approach. I’m not sure if it would be a separate product or not, though.

Closing Comments

I think a large part of my difficulty with esoteric dragons is that they are a poor fit for the sorcerer class altogether. The minimalist approach (pull from the psychic bloodline) seems woefully inadequate. Creating a prestige class to fix it smacks of a band-aid fix, and I don’t like those. A sorcerer archetype is my favored solution from a design standpoint, tweak the class first before adding the psychic dragon stuff.

Ultimately, though, I think keeping them as a psychic class thing and making them psychic disciplines (possibly with a generic ‘draconic’ discipline) is the right way to go. I’ve got some more reading to do.


XML Workflow, A New Direction

A-Z 2016 "X"A couple years ago, or just slightly more, I wrote about my workflow for extracting game information captured in Word. It’s kind of long:

  • Type (or copy and paste) into Word;
  • Convert Word files to ‘Filtered HTML’;
  • Fix character encoding;
  • Convert to XHTML;
  • Convert to XML closer and closer to the problem domain (game elements) using a series of XSLT scripts.

Once I’ve got the information encoded I can do other transformations to get my actual goal products:

  • Machine-generated diagrams:
    • Build a hierarchical model for each game element that has or is a prerequisite;
    • Convert that hierarchical model into DOT format (GraphViz input file; I’ve written about visualization using GraphViz before);
    • Render the DOT files into PNG and SVG format, giving me diagrams I can redraw (GraphViz is powerful, the output isn’t always suitable for inclusion in my books) showing the relationships between game elements.
  • PDFs:
    • Convert XML files (created as above, but using ‘book markup’) to LaTeX;
    • Convert LaTeX to PDF (this can incorporate diagrams redrawn as described above.
  • Index and analysis files; I sometimes create spreadsheets containing…
    • spell summary information;
    • master spell lists for all classes (and domains and bloodlines and patrons…);
    • summary monster stats;
  • I also sometimes create new Word files containing aggregated or reformatted content.

This has proven fairly effective over the last few years, but I think it’s time for a change. Word has a ‘WordProcessingML’ that represents, to a fairly large degree, the internal memory representation of a document. There is a great deal of information there that can be discarded, and some ‘internal Wordisms’ I’ll need to work around, but I think this can get me past some niggling translation and encoding difficulties I’ve been having.

The new workflow will probably look much like:

  • Type (or copy and paste) into Word;
  • Convert Word files to WordProcessingML;
  • Convert to XML closer and closer to the problem domain (game elements) using a series of XSLT scripts.

This doesn’t seem like it saves me a lot of steps, but in reality it does. The “Fix character encoding”, “Word -> Filtered HTML”, and “Filtered HTML -> XHTML” do useful work, but all three stages introduce some annoying data artifacts I need to work around. The new workflow should not only reduce the number of stages (the initial bullet points), but should make the processing after that much simpler.

Weapons and Armor made of ‘Special Materials’

A-Z 2016 "W"A recent question on Facebook reminded me that I was going to review and revise how special materials work with graded items.

In short, I expect to look primarily at the effect of the special material and build from there.

Sample Materials

A few of the common materials from the PRD, first quoting the PRD and then giving my take on them.

In almost all cases, I disregard part of the description: almost all ‘metal materials’ are actually alloys rather than pure materials. This lets me treat them as justification for various qualities at different grades, and even allows me to mix them somewhat.

Bypassing DR/material is usually more or less free — the target has a benefit that renders them less harmed by everything except this material, so this material bypassing that is not inherent in the material and shouldn’t be paid for. Actually, I’d be willing to consider a quality that directly targets and adds damage in these cases: an item made of special silver doesn’t just bypass DR/silver, it does additional damage (as with flaming or bane… not sure which, I could go either way).


Mined from rocks that fell from the heavens, this ultrahard metal adds to the quality of a weapon or suit of armor. Weapons fashioned from adamantine have a natural ability to bypass hardness when sundering weapons or attacking objects, ignoring hardness less than 20. Armor made from adamantine grants its wearer damage reduction of 1/— if it’s light armor, 2/— if it’s medium armor, and 3/— if it’s heavy armor. Adamantine is so costly that weapons and armor made from it are always of masterwork quality; the masterwork cost is included in the prices given below. Thus, adamantine weapons and ammunition have a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls, and the armor check penalty of adamantine armor is lessened by 1 compared to ordinary armor of its type. Items without metal parts cannot be made from adamantine. An arrow could be made of adamantine, but a quarterstaff could not.

Weapons and armor normally made of steel that are made of adamantine have one-third more hit points than normal. Adamantine has 40 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 20.

Type of Adamantine Item Item Price Modifier
Ammunition +60 gp per item
Light armor +5,000 gp
Medium armor +10,000 gp
Heavy armor +15,000 gp
Weapon +3,000 gp

So… weapons gain hardness 20 (from the default of steel’s hardness 10) and bypasses DR/adamantine (which is uncommon). Armor gains DR 1/— if light, DR 2/— if medium, or DR 3/— if heavy. Per RAW they’re all masterwork but the price is included.

I’m going to reduce this to basics:

  • The impervious perk increases an item’s hardness by 5. I’m willing to let that be repeated, and since perks are considered grade 1 qualities I’m willing to have impervious have multiple grades: hardness is increased by 5 per grade. Adamantine has a hardness of 20, 10 higher than steel, so this would be a grade 2 quality.
  • The durable perk doubles an items hit points… but the sturdy quality from Green Ronin’s Black Company masterworks rules is +50% per grade. I think I like that better, so I’ll be dropping the ‘durable’ perk. An adamantine weapon or armor has a third more hit points than usual (but double the hit points per inch thickness, strange), so I’ll call that one grade and make it a bit better at 50% more hit points.
  • DR/— from armor is one grade per point of DR. There could reasonably be a surcharge or limitation of some sort of for light and medium armor, but I’m not going to bother yet. In any case, DR/— is handled.

The effects of a weapon made of an adamantine alloy are “+50% hit points, +10 hardness”: a grade 1 quality and a grade 2 quality. In a weapon with no other qualities, this adds 4,500 gp to the market price of the item. Unlike RAW, this is not a ‘masterwork item’ (no +1 enhancement bonus to hit).

If I wanted to be fiercer about it, I could say that adamantine construction is itself a grade 3 quality… but I won’t do that today.

Adamantine armor is pretty simple. Like weapons the hit points and hardness are increased, and the armor grants DR/—.

  • Light armor gains hardness 20 and 50% more hit points, and DR 1/—. This amounts to one grade 2 quality and two grade 1 qualities, a total of four grades. This adds 4,000 gp to the market price (4*4*500 gp = 8,000 gp, halved because this is armor).
  • Medium armor gains hardness 20 and 50% more hit points, and DR 2/—. Two grade 2 qualities and one grade 1 quality, a total of five grades. This adds 6,250 gp to the market price (5*5*500 gp = 12,500 gp, halved because this is armor).
  • Heavy armor gains hardness 20 and 50% more hit points, and DR 3/—. A grade 3 quality, a grade 2 quality, and a grade 1 quality, a total of six grades. This adds 9,000 gp to the market price (6*6*500 gp = 18,000 gp, halved because this is armor).

The armor is generally lighter than RAW because the costs are halved, but unlike RAW these will make following qualities more expensive… by quite a bit, really.


Mithral is a rare, silvery metal that is lighter than steel but just as hard. When worked like steel, it can be used to create amazing armor, and is occasionally used for other items as well. Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor. A character wearing mithral full plate must be proficient in wearing heavy armor to avoid adding the armor’s check penalty on all his attack rolls and skill checks that involve moving. Spell failure chances for armors and shields made from mithral are decreased by 10%, maximum Dexterity bonuses are increased by 2, and armor check penalties are decreased by 3 (to a minimum of 0).

An item made from mithral weighs half as much as the same item made from other metals. In the case of weapons, this lighter weight does not change a weapon’s size category or the ease with which it can be wielded (whether it is light, one-handed, or two-handed). Items not primarily of metal are not meaningfully affected by being partially made of mithral. (A longsword can be a mithral weapon, while a quarterstaff cannot.) Mithral weapons count as silver for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.

Weapons and armors fashioned from mithral are always masterwork items as well; the masterwork cost is included in the prices given below.

Mithral has 30 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 15.

Type of Mithral Item Item Price Modifier
Light armor +1,000 gp
Medium armor +4,000 gp
Heavy armor +9,000 gp
Shield +1,500 gp
Other items +500 gp/lb.

Mithral halves the weight of primarily metal items and increases the hardness by 5. There is no mention of an increase in hit points.

Armor has decreased spell failure chance, increased maximum Dexterity bonus to AC, and Armor check penalties are reduced by 3… this ends up being quite nice. Also, the armor is treated as one category lighter (heavy treated as medium, medium treated as light) to a minimum of light, for the purpose of mobility and other features, but not proficiency.

  • The lightweight perk halves an item’s weight, and could be considered a grade 1 quality.
    • The light quality from Green Ronin’s Black Company masterworks rules reduces weight by 10% per grade, but that seems too expensive for its regular effect. Reducing weight by half honestly isn’t worth a grade 5 quality. I’m going with the lightweight perk for now.
  • The mastercraft quality from Green Ronin’s Black Company masterworks rules reduces armor check penalty by one per grade. I’ll go with this for now. By RAW the check penalties are reduced by 3, but I’m willing to allow this to completely negate the armor check penalties… if someone is willing to invest that much, I’m prepared to allow it.
    • The creeping armor special ability is a +5,000 gp in RAW, and is in the +2 Armor Special Ability table. It negates the armor check penalty for Stealth checks, while the mastercraft quality applies to all relevant checks. I’m inclined to go with the mastercraft quality.
  • The modifier to arcane spell failure is a little trickier, but the Magic Item Compendium from D&D 3.5 has the twilight armor quality. This +1 armor quality reduces arcane spell failure by 10%. As a +1 armor quality maps to a grade 2 quality in this system, I’m fairly comfortable considering twilight a scaling quality reducing arcane spell failure by 5% per grade. As with mastercraft above, someone could entirely negate arcane spell failure… but it gets very expensive for heavy armor (grade 8 to negate the 40% arcane spell failure of splint mail and half-plate!).
  • I don’t have anything specific for increasing the maximum Dexterity bonus to AC, but since an enhancement bonus is two grades per +1 I’m willing to call this one grade per increase here. For now at least.
  • The mobility advantages seem pretty mild, really. I’ll call them a grade 1 quality for now.

Given the above, to exactly model mithral weapons basically halves the weight (lightweight, grade 1) and increases hardness by 5 (impervious I, grade 1); that the weapon counts as silver for DR purposes is basically free. In the absence of other improvement, a mithral weapon adds (2*2*500 gp) 2,000 gp to a weapon’s market price. This is spot on for a longsword, more expensive for a short sword or dagger, less expensive for a great axe. Since it doesn’t really do anything, I’m okay with it.

Armor, on the other hand, gets quite a bit more expensive.

  • Light armor doesn’t benefit from the reduced category, but does benefit from lightweight (grade 1), improved maximum Dexterity bonus (grade 2, +2), reduced armor check penalty (grade 2 — the only relevant armor has an ACP of -2), and reduced arcane spell failure (grade 2, 10%). This is a total of seven grades! This would thus be worth 12,250 gp (7*7*500 gp = 24,500 gp, halved because it’s armor).
  • Medium and heavy armor would actually be the same: lighter category (grade 1), lightweight (grade 1), improved maximum Dexterity bonus (grade 2, +2), reduced armor check penalty (grade 3), reduced arcane spell failure (grade 2). This is a total of nine grades, and add, in the absence of other improvements, 20,250 gp (9*9*500 gp = 40,500 gp, halved because this is armor).
  • A light steel shield isn’t so bad: lightweight (grade 1), reduced armor check penalty (grade 1), reduced arcane spell failure (grade 1, 5%), a total of three grades. 2,250 gp (3*3*500 gp = 4,500 gp, halved).
  • A heavy steel shield is more expensive: lightweight (grade 1), reduced armor check penalty (grade 2), reduced arcane spell failure (grade 2, 10%). A total of five grades, 6,250 gp (5*5*500 gp = 12,500, halved).

Combining Special Materials

Because these are alloys rather than pure metals, it seems plausible that someone could try to blend them into an item that does more. An adamantine/mithral mix might incorporate the features of both.

A longsword made of an alloy (or pattern-welded billet of these two materials with steel) might include:

  • hardness 20 (impervious, grade 2)
  • +50% hit points (sturdy, grade 1)
  • lightweight (grade 1)

This is a basic grade 4 item with a market price of 8,000 gp.

A suit of chainmail made of this material, though…

  • hardness 20 (impervious, grade 2)
  • +50% hit points (sturdy, grade 1)
  • DR 2/— (grade 2)
  • lighter category (grade 1)
  • lightweight (grade 1)
  • improved maximum Dexterity bonus (grade 2, +2)
  • reduced armor check penalty (grade 3)
  • reduced arcane spell failure (grade 2, 10%)

Grade 14! This adds a 49,000 gp to the market price (14*14*500 = 98,000 gp, halved). This is before adding any other qualities!

As just a suit of adamantine chainmail this would be only a grade 5 item (6,250 gp market price). As just a suit of mithral it would still be grade 10 (25,000 gp market price).

Complex alloys are expensive… but since by RAW they don’t exist at all, I’ll probably be okay with that after I get past being a bit stunned.

Closing Comments

By looking at the effects of special materials, and how they fit into the rest of the framework, they can do some strange things to the costs. The materials themselves are largely unimportant, acting primarily as justification for crafting the items with these qualities. To be honest I’d be inclined to split some of the materials up a bit. Mithral does many things, and they don’t all apply to all wearers (the reduce arcane spell failure). Having the improved maximum Dexterity bonus a mix of material and cunning construction (rather than a fixed value whether the crafter wants it or not) could be a reasonable change as well, as might the reduced armor check penalty.

RAW, I don’t see why almost all armor isn’t made of mithral. It’s amazingly cheap for what it does, especially since the cost doesn’t scale with other improvements.

Actually, I’m pretty sure mithral is the most common special material for armor. As it should be, looking at this.

Variation: Graded Item Sets

A-Z 2016 "V"“Magic item sets” were an artifact (sorry) of the late D&D 3.x era. A small group of items related by their history and power, with a synergy between them that made them more powerful together than apart.

The regalia of the phoenix consisted of the raptor’s mask, the crown of flames, the talon scepter, and the phoenix cloak. Each was a magic item in its own right, often relatively minor (worth 3,500 gp, 8,500 gp, 10,305 gp, and 50,000 gp respectively). If you had and wore/wielded two or more of them you gained increasing power from their synergy: 5/day resistance to fire when you had two of the items, 5/day immunity to fire when you had three of the items, and 1/day heal when reduced to 0..-9 hit points when you had all four items.

What if you could do something similar with graded items?

One way to go about it — and I’m not entirely certain this is workable — is to have items that are part of the same set add their grades together for effect. Individually they are all still magic items, but together they act as a much more powerful item… albeit in multiple item slots.

The Lightning Harness

The lightning harness might be a suit of armor consisting of several pieces that are individually enchanted. The breastplate (armor slot), helm (head slot), gauntlets (wrists slot), and boots (feet slot) are each magic items that combine to make a more powerful whole. Let’s give them preliminary grades of 7, 6, 4, and 3 respectively — a total of 20.

In the first pass I’ll assign a single quality to each piece

Item Grade Qualities
stormplate 7 (4) +2 enhancement, (2) electricity resistance I (5 points), (1) lightweight
lightning helm 6 (2) +1 enhancement, (2) electricity resistance I (5 points), (1) enemy glow (elementals), (1) alert I (+2 Perception)
shock gauntlets 4 (2) shock I (+1d6 electricity damage), (1) hated foe (elementals), (1) sacred (god of storms)
wind boots 3 (2) dexterity I, (1) nimble I (+2 Acrobatics)

… well. This might be a bust. Of all the options above, only the enhancement bonuses and the electricity resistance can even stack. If one character wears both the stormplate and the lightning helm that character has what amounts to a grade 13 item with +3 enhancement (grade 6, within limits, 7 grades remaining), electricity resistance 10 (grade 4, within limits, 3 grades remaining), then the lightweightenemy glow, and alert qualities (each grade 1).

On the other hand, as a grade 13 item that would normally have a market price of 42,250 gp (13*13*500 gp = 84,500 gp, but halved because it’s all armor). As separate items they have a market price of only 21,250 gp (7*7*500 gp = 24,500 gp, halved to 12,250 gp; 6*6*500 gp= 18,000 gp, halved to 9,000 gp). This is just over half the normal price. If you can afford the slots, it costs a lot less gold to go this way. It does load the item down with more low-grade qualities than might otherwise happen.

All four items together would have the qualities of a grade 20 item, which has a market price of 100,000 gp (20*20*500 gp, halved for being armor… should actually be a bit more because the shock I quality is a weapon quality, but it’s tiny compared to the rest. As individual items the total comes to 27,500 gp, only a little more than a quarter.

I suspect we’ll find the most synergy when more of the items’ qualities match. Let’s see…

The Four-Part Elemental Staff

The four-part elemental staff is currently separated into four wands, one for each element. These wands to not all have the same grades. These wands can be fitted together in arbitrary order to combine their powers.

  • The wand of elemental air is a grade 6 wand and can cast stinking cloud (3), summon monster II (2, air elemental), feather fall (1)
  • The wand of elemental earth is a grade 4 wand and can cast summon monster II (2, earth elemental), detect secret doors (1), magic weapon (1)
  • The wand of elemental fire is a grade 6 wand and can cast fireball (3), summon monster II (2, earth elemental), burning hands (1)
  • The wand of elemental water is a grade 4 wand and can cast summon monster III (2, water elemental), grease (1), obscuring mist (1)

If the wand of elemental earth or the wand of elemental water is fitted together with any one other wand, the result is still a wand, otherwise the result is a staff.

In all cases, the resulting item has the summon monster levels ‘added together’ (two wands means the summon monster II is replaced by summon monster IV, three wands means the summon monster II is replaced by summon monster VI, and all four together allow the wielder to cast summon monster VIII). The charges are likewise added together, and the caster level increases to the sum of the wands’ levels.

The wand of elemental earth and fire (the two fitted together) is a grade 10 item with summon monster IV (4), fireball (3), burning hands (1), detect secret doors (1), and magic weapon (1) spells, and 10 charges that can be spent on any combination of these spells. You can separate the wands if you want a weaker summon monster II again, but it’ll be cast at a lower caster level.

The four-part elemental staff, when completely combined, is a grade 20 item with the following spells:

  • summon monster VIII (8 charges; air, earth, fire, or water elementals)
  • fireball (3 charges)
  • stinking cloud (3 charges)
  • burning hands (1 charge)
  • detect secret doors (1 charge)
  • feather fall (1 charge)
  • grease (1 charge)
  • magic weapon (1 charge)
  • obscuring mist (1 charge)

All spells are cast at 20th level.

As a grade 20 item the staff would be 20*20*500 gp = 200,000 gp. As the four wands the cost would be 6*6*500 gp = 18,000 gp for the air and fire wands, and 4*4*500 gp = 8,000 gp for the earth and water wands, for a total of 52,000 gp.

Clearly Some Adjustment is Needed

I very much wanted this to work, but it doesn’t look quite right to me. “Combining the item powers” doesn’t seem to do enough, and the market price implications can result in wildly cheaper power.

When I say combining the item powers doesn’t do enough, I mean it’s just basic aggregation, and being allowed to do it when you otherwise wouldn’t (the enhancement and energy resistance qualities in the lightning harness, and the summon monster spells in the four-part elemental staff). Boring, not cool.

At the same time, by splitting into four separate items of approximately equal power, the total cost is reduced to a little more than a quarter. For the lightning harness this isn’t horrible, since it also ties up four item slots (armor, helmet, wrists, feet), but for the four-part elemental staff it’s basically a non-issue.

I’ve considered some combination of quirks, flaws, and curses based on level of the wielder compared to the grade of the item, or increasing some element of unpleasantness based on the number of items, but nothing feels right yet.

Umbral Mail

A-Z 2016 "U"Umbral mail, ‘shadow armor’, should probably be a thing. I picture a suit of light mail (chain shirt perhaps?) worn by a rogue who practiced greater and greater acts of stealth.

It is a bit like Gyre’s cunning cambeson, so I should look for some ways to differentiate it.

Gyre’s Cunning Gambeson (grade 7 padded armor)

magic resistance I climbing II hiding II disabling I padded armor

This arming doublet (padded armor) is crafted grade 7 armor with cleverly-hidden pockets and places to conceal tools, and many of its arming points are well-suited for fastening climbing gear. It is made of dark green velvet and has been repeatedly soaked in moly extract. It has the magic resistance Iclimbing II, hiding II, and disabling I qualities.

  • (grade 2) magic resistance I: +1 resistance bonus to saves and Armor Class against spells.
  • (grade 2) climbing II: +4 bonus to Climb checks when the armor can apply (stacks with the bonus gained from a climbing kit).
  • (grade 2) hiding II: +4 bonus to Hide (visual Stealth) checks when appropriate (both hiding the wielder and hiding tiny or smaller objects — including especially thieves’ tools — in the gambeson).
  • (grade 1) disabling I: +2 bonus to Disable Device checks; the right tools are immediately at hand.

An a crafted grade 7 item, Gyre’s cunning gambeson would have a market price of 24,500 gp… but as armor it gets halved, so 12,250 gp.

Umbral Mail Qualities

Chain Shirt by V ShaneFirst, the armor is good at making the character sneaky, so the stealthy quality will probably be pretty high. The shadow (+3,750 gp/+2 quality, +5 to Stealth checks), improved shadow (+15,000 gp/+4 quality, +10 to Stealth checks), and greater shadow (+33,750 gp/+5 quality, +15 to Stealth checks) are all appropriate, but are better served as skill-based qualities.

Second, some measure of Dexterity enhancement is appropriate… but I suspect not ultimately valuable as far as Armor Class is concerned because a chain shirt has a maximum Dexterity bonus of +4 to AC. I’ll likely give a small bonus and stop there.

Third, the creeping armor quality (+5,000 gp, listed in the “+2 armor special ability table”, means the armor’s armor check penalty doesn’t apply to Stealth checks… we’re going to want this, and because it’s with the +2 armor qualities it’ll be a grade 4 quality). However, on a chain shirt (armor check penalty -2) there’s not nearly as much benefit as on heavier armor.

Fourth, the glamered quality (+2,700 gp, listed in the “+2 armor special qualities”… but is very much toward the lower end, I’ll consider it as a grade 3 quality) is appropriate.

I might want to consider some other perks. Of them all, lightweight seems the most appropriate.

This gives me:

  • stealthy (replaces the shadow quality, +2 to Stealth checks per grade instead of +5/grade 4, +10/grade 8, +15/grade 10 for normal quality conversion)
  • glamered (+2 -> grade 3 quality, so the armor doesn’t look like armor), might or might not use.
  • creeping (+2 -> grade 4 quality, armor check penalty no longer applies to Stealth checks), probably won’t use.
  • Dexterity enhancement (+2 grades/+2 bonus to Dexterity), might use a little
  • Armor enhancement (+1 enhancement/2 grades)

Highest priority goes to stealthy, I’ll consider a Dexterity enhancement as available, and the spell casting is a major quality to this item. I prefer that qualities do not get weaker from grade to grade, so I’ll want to assign them carefully.

Grade Quality Added Item Description Notes
1 (1) lightweight lightweight chain shirt half weight
2 (1) stealthy I lightweight stealthy I chain shirt +2 Stealth, half weight
3 (2) stealthy II lightweight stealthy II chain shirt +4 Stealth, half weight
5 (2) +1 enhancement +1 lightweight stealthy II chain shirt +1, +4 Stealth, half weight
6 (3) stealthy III +1 lightweight stealthy III chain shirt +1, +6 Stealth, half weight
7 (4) stealthy IV +1 lightweight stealthy IV chain shirt +1, +8 Stealth, half weight
9 (2) dexterity I +1 dexterity I lightweight stealthy IV chain shirt +1, +2 Dex, +8 Stealth, half weight
10 (5) stealthy V +1 dexterity I lightweight stealthy V chain shirt +1, +2 Dex, +10 Stealth, half weight
11 (6) stealthy VI +1 dexterity I lightweight stealthy VI chain shirt +1, +2 Dex, +12 Stealth, half weight
13 (4) +2 enhancement +2 dexterity I lightweight stealthy VI chain shirt +2, +2 Dex, +12 Stealth, half weight
14 (7) stealthy VII +2 dexterity I lightweight stealthy VII chain shirt +2, +2 Dex, +14 Stealth, half weight
15 (8) stealthy VIII +2 dexterity I lightweight stealthy VIII chain shirt +2, +2 Dex, +16 Stealth, half weight
17 (2) stanching +2 dexterity I lightweight stanching stealthy VII chain shirt +2, +2 Dex, +16 Stealth, half weight, reduces bleed damage by 2
18 (9) stealthy IX +2 dexterity I lightweight stanching stealthy IX chain shirt +2, +2 Dex, +18 Stealth, half weight, reduces bleed damage by 2
19 (10) stealthy X +2 dexterity I lightweight stanching stealthy X chain shirt +2, +2 Dex, +20 Stealth, half weight, reduces bleed damage by 2

Closing Comments

I added the stanching quality at the last minute. I needed a grade 2 power and that was the only +1 armor quality that seemed at all a reasonable fit. I could have gone with another skill-oriented quality (slippery, bonus to Escape Artist checks, came to mind) or another quality, but nothing really fit. I stumbled on a limitation here in that just as you will always have at least one grade 1 quality, eventually you will have either a grade 2 quality or two more grade 1 qualities. Since the armor already has a maximum Dexterity bonus with regard to Armor Class I chose to improve the armor enhancement bonus rather than the Dexterity bonus.

In a case like this I might consider softening the rule in practice. Replacing the stanching at grade 17 with dexterity II (+4 enhancement bonus to Dexterity) would not break anything… but as an example, I suppose I should stick to what I’m presenting an example of.

I must also that I liked the pattern I saw here, with (some quality), (two stealthy quality bumps back to back), (empty grade), and chose to develop that. I originally expected this armor to be more magic-oriented, with the spell casting quality (‘wand’ containing reduce person (Sor/Wiz 1), invisibility (Sor/Wiz 2), shrink item (Sor/Wiz 3), and nondetection (Sor/Wiz3) at increasingly high grade… but with the focus on the stealthy quality, the point of the armor, I never found a good time to fit the spell casting quality in. I could have, it might have looked something like below

Grade Quality Added Notes
1 (1) lightweight half weight
2 (1) spell casting I CL 1, reduce person
3 (1) stealthy I +2 Stealth
5 (3) spell casting III CL 3, invisibilityreduce person
6 (2) stealthy II +4 Stealth
8 (1) +1 enhancement +1 AC
11 (6) spell casting VI CL 6, shrink iteminvisibilityreduce person
12 (1) mindlinked nonverbal activation of the ‘wand’
14 (4) +2 enhancement +2 AC
17 (9) spell casting IX CL 9, nondetectionshrink iteminvisibilityreduce person

I am coming to suspect that the spell casting quality works best in items that do not grow over time. That is, if the armor above were presented in its final form, or even one of its intermediate forms (lightweight stealthy I spellcasting III chain shirt as a grade 5 item) I’d be just fine with it. Presented in table form as above, though, I find it unpleasant to look upon.

Unchained Skill Unlocks for Echelon

A-Z 2016 "U"I don’t often post much Echelon-related material here any more (mostly it’s at, but this particular post fits the skill model I had in mind before I moved over there.

Also, it gives me a ‘U Day’ post for this year’s A-Z Blog Challenge. I am not proud.

I’ve only recently gotten around to reading Pathfinder® Roleplaying Game: Pathfinder Unchained™, and the skill unlocks are philosophically quite close to my early skill model. In my skill model, each skill was a separate talent, and taking that talent at progressively higher tiers gave you options for what you could do with that skill that others could not.

Anyone could try to tightrope walk, but someone who had the skill at the Heroic tier was not only more likely to succeed (higher bonus to the check), but be able to do things on a successful check that others couldn’t. And probably didn’t have to make some checks at all: a test intended to challenge an Expert-tier character could be assumed successful if a character with that skill at the Heroic tier attempted it. If the more-skilled character tried to do a Heroic-tier trick with the skill then a check would be needed again.

For example, in D&D 3.x (which I was using for my base when this was still the skill model) on a successful Balance check you could navigate a precarious surface at half speed. You could try to move your normal speed but took a -5 penalty to your check. In this older Echelon skill model you no longer took this penalty when you tried to move at normal speed if you had Balance at the Heroic tier or higher.

A ravine bridged with a fallen tree, narrow and swaying slightly with the weight of each person crossing it, might have had a DC 10 check to cross — an Expert-level test. Anyone could try it, most people without penalties would succeed (and those of at least Expert tier would have at least +2 level bonus to their check; someone at the Expert tier and the Balance talent at any tier would have +4 on top of that, then Dexterity bonus on top of that). A character with Balance at the Heroic tier wouldn’t even have to check at all, to cross at half speed, and could make a check at no penalty (for increased speed) to cross at full speed.

Higher-tier abilities allowed progressively more. This would be either because of reduced penalties or options simply not available to others. For instance, a trained crafter can make masterwork items, while someone who does not have the relevant Craft talent cannot, regardless of the DC beaten by the skill check.

The unchained skill unlocks are pretty similar, philosophically speaking. Some examples:


With sufficient ranks in Climb, you earn the following.

5 Ranks: You are no longer denied your Dexterity bonus when climbing.

10 Ranks: You gain a natural climb speed (but not the +8 racial bonus on Climb checks) of 10 feet, but only on surfaces with a Climb DC of 20 or lower.

15 Ranks: You gain a natural climb speed (but not the +8 racial bonus on Climb checks) equal to your base speed on surfaces with a Climb DC of 20 or lower, and of 10 feet on all other surfaces.

20 Ranks: You gain a natural climb speed equal to your base speed on all surfaces. If you have both hands free, you gain a +8 racial bonus on Climb checks.


With sufficient ranks in Craft, you earn the following.

5 Ranks: When determining your weekly progress, double the result of your Craft check before multiplying the result by the item’s DC.

10 Ranks: You do not ruin any of your raw materials unless you fail a check by 10 or more.

15 Ranks: When you determine your progress, the result of your check is how much work you complete each day in silver pieces.

20 Ranks: You can craft magic armor, magic weapons, magic rings, and wondrous items that fall under your category of Craft using the normal Craft rules.


With sufficient ranks in Heal, you earn the following.

5 Ranks: When you treat deadly wounds, the target recovers hit points and ability damage as if it had rested for a full day.

10 Ranks: When you treat deadly wounds, the target recovers hit points as if it had rested for a full day with long-term care.

15 Ranks: When you treat deadly wounds, the creature recovers hit point and ability damage as if it had rested for 3 days.

20 Ranks: When you treat deadly wounds, the target recovers hit point and ability damage as if it had rested for 3 days with long-term care.

Not all of these work for me as written, but they’re a starting point.

One change I would make: Echelon is based on tiers being four levels each. Rather than having these skill unlocks take place at levels 5, 10, 15, and 20 — the top of the five-level tiers (unofficially used) in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, I’d assign them to the starting levels of each tier above Expert in Echelon: 5, 9, 13, 17. This does two things. First, it aligns them with the tiers. Second, it aligns them with the start of the tier, so as talents they kick in as soon as you take the talent, and you gain the benefit of the tier ability for the entire tier instead of just a small piece of it.

These are only small benefits, though. I suspect with the revision I made to talents (so skill-oriented talents have a major effect by their focus and a minor effect on the underlying skill) I’d do much the same here. There might be multiple talents that hang off Climb checks, each giving different primary abilities, but all give these minor effects on Climb checks — to the effect of the highest tier in a relevant talent.

Thinking Again About the Price of Graded Spell Trigger Items

I explored the market price of graded wands and staves a couple weeks ago, and I’m pretty satisfied with that result.A-Z 2016 "T"

Then I decided that granting graded items some limited spell casting ability — a few spells that can be used daily, sort of thing — could be pretty cool. The fire gauntlet of Allioch was implemented in part by making a lesser wand of military fire part of its construction, as a grade 5 quality.

Yesterday I got to thinking about the difference between spell trigger item market prices and ‘uses/day’ item market prices. A grade 8 wand (fourth-level, second-level, and two first-level spells; 8 charges) can cast its biggest spell twice per day. I’m confident in my reasoning behind the graded wand market price, but allowing the wand to be added to the gauntlet and used by a non-caster should probably move it to the ‘uses/day’ cost, something like that of an ‘eternal wand’ from late 3.x era… which should be somewhat more expensive, about twice as much.

Then it occurred to me that the ‘spell casting’ quality (that embeds the ‘wand’ into the other item) is a quality of a grade equal to the wand’s.

This means that the same grade 8 wand that costs 32,000 gp as a spell-trigger item is a grade 8 quality, not a collection of smaller qualities adding up to item grade 8.

A grade 8 quality can only be added to a grade 15 (or higher) item. That means that rather than a market price of 32,000 gp, the spell casting quality has a market price of 15*8*500= 60,000 gp, almost exactly double the market price of the original wand (and taking a huge bite out of the grades available to be assigned for this item… and not scaling with the grade of the item itself: it’s always a grade 8 wand).

Okay, adding a graded wand to a grade item as a ‘spell casting’ quality is not giving away too much. It might even be overcharging for what you get… but for now I’ll leave it. The ability for a sword to drop a wall of fire at need is not to be underestimated.