Limitation Question
 

I'm working up magic items as gadgets (for pricing purposes). I'm trying to figure out if there should be a limitation added to items that have to be attuned before they are used. I am already halving the limitation for Can Be Stolen naturally, but I'm figuring that attunement rules would be an Accessability limitation of some sort.

For mages it will simply be hold the item and spend FP (one or more) to attune it to your aura. For non-mages I'm thinking some sort of ritual: like sleep with it under your pillow wrapped in a silk cloth for a night (or more complicated for more powerful items).

I'm thinking -10% accessability for most things, -20% for really complicated attument rituals, and for the mage atunement a -1% per FP cost (basically a -70% limitation on Costs Fatigue).

Does anyone see any serious flaws in these numbers?

Re: Limitation Question
 

Question: Are you requiring characters to buy enchanted items as gadgets (even ones they find while adventuring)? Or are you just using cp values to balance items against each other, and determine a fair $ cost?

If characters already have to spend points on an item, that's basically attuning to it. In fact, I'm not sure how you'd even have a gadget *without* the need to attune to it. The attunement process can be whatever you'd like, but it wouldn't be worth any extra points.

If the characters don't have to spend points on gadgets, and you're just treating it like equipment, then sure - attunement as an Accessibility limitation makes sense.

Re: Limitation Question
 

Good questions. Yes, since I am going to be modeling a D&D world these magic items are treated like equipment. They may or may not be signature gear, but they won't be advantages on the character sheets. As I read your comments you then concur.

What do you think of the values I was thinking of applying to it? Mages could use the non-mage method if they wanted to not incure a Threshhold debt (as most mages in my world get their energy that way) but they also have the option of the quick method which is why I figured that the non-FP way doesn't get a reduction in its value like the FP one does.

Re: Limitation Question
 

It's an enhancement; or as you noted, lowers the drawback of the Can Be Stolen limitation. From your other post it looks like you are thinking about energy/cash price effects, and there it's also a source of a markup, both for the being harder to steal effect (which is a benefit somebody might want enough to part with a couple extra bucks for), and because the enchantment itself is more complicated (includes some sort of identity recognition routine after all) and hence presumably requires more time or skill to build in the first place.

Why do you think it's a limitation at all? That is, in what way are you worse off having a gadget with this property than without it? As far as I can see the only time is could ever make a difference is the day you acquired it - a drawback that wears off after one day isn't a serious limitation.

Re: Limitation Question
 

I do see your point. However, if you take my ring and attune it to yourself before I get it back, I have to reattune it. Perhaps you are right though, its all an enhancement on Cannot Steal plus a 0% feature... maybe the -1% per FP limitation for enhancing instantly since that is a cost that could bite you if done at the wrong time?

Re: Limitation Question
 

How fast do they become unattuned?

Re: Limitation Question
 

I hadn't though of attunment as something that faded so as I'm currently thinking it, only when someone else attunes it.