Caelesti's page

LoreKeeper wrote:

I, for one, encourage Paizo wholeheartedly to take my non-top-32 submission and consider it (or its core ideas) for future wondrous items; say for Ultimate Equipment. ;)

This is absolutely my thought. I keep going "I want this it the game, I know it isn't right for the contest. I know I could have fluffed and polished it more, but it would be a great item to play with."

+1

I really like my item, and feel it would be a solid inclusion in the game, even if the judges apparently feel it's not Superstar material. But then, there's only maybe a dozen Top 32 items since Superstar started that I would ever actually include in any of my campaigns, so clearly it's not all about making a good item.

While I fretted plenty over my item, having now looked over the Top 32, I find myself having no idea what I 'did wrong', and so I'm really going to have to get a lot of feedback, because I don't actually feel that my item is any weaker than the majority of Top 32 entries. I certainly feel that I could have done better, so I know the feeling you're referring to, but I also feel I did well enough to at least make it to the alternates, given the competition, so I'm going to have to give a lot of thought to this next year and really take to heart whatever critique I get. Ironically, the worst possible critique I feel I could get is something like: "you got 2 keeps but no golden ticket", because although I'd be elated to know I came that close, I'd have no idea how to reach the next level.

In my experience, no matter what language you choose, it's the wrong one that will never be used, ever.

Then your GMs aren't doing their job. A good GM should find ways to incorporate ALL of the skills and abilities of their players into the campaign. Maybe not into every adventure, but if you have a player who speaks a wide variety of esoteric languages for RP reasons, let them benefit from that every now and then. Adventure Paths as written are, for the most part, suggestions. A good GM can substitute monsters, skill checks, etc without anyone knowing unless they read the original AP.

Sometimes I wonder if better advice wouldn't be to just do what I do when creating content for homebrew campaigns: Find a couple things similar done by Paizo, and follow the template exactly, by breaking it down into its component parts.

For example, here's the description of Gloves of Arrow Snaring.

Once worn, these snug gloves seem to meld with the hands, becoming almost invisible to casual observation. Twice per day, the wearer can act as if he had the Snatch Arrows feat, even if he does not meet the prerequisites for the feat. Both gloves must be worn for the magic to be effective, and at least one hand must be free to take advantage of the magic.

Which boils down to:

<descriptive sentence>. <frequency>, <benefit>, <clarification>. <additional requirements>.

So, using this format, more than one sentence of description would be right out, and really you should keep that length about the same. It then shows a reasonable order for presenting the rest of the information, and reminds you to put clarifications and special requirements at the end, after describing all the cool stuff the magical item lets you do.

So, an example using that format for Bracers of Distance Throwing:

These heavy bronze bracers, set with images of giants hurling boulders, clasp snugly around the wearer's forearms. For five rounds each day, which need not be consecutive, the wearer can act as if he had the Distance Thrower feat, or double the benefit gained if the wearer already has the feat. Both bracers must be worn for the magic to be effective.

Obviously, this is Feat-in-a-can and no wow factor at all, so no chance at Superstar for something this simple, but it illustrates how to find an item and follow the basic format.

Caelesti wrote:

If the player is going to [all the trouble of investing in crafting skills, item creation feats, etc, then I see absolutely no reason to bar said player from a reasonable amount of items created with said skills/feats. If the fighter with Craft: Armoursmithing shows up with a Masterwork Breastplate she crafted herself, then good for her.

Answer this hypothetical for me, would you please?

A player puts together a halfling rogue and places skill ranks into disable device, stealth, knowledge local, perception and bluff, and takes skill focus (disable device) as their feat.

This player then rolls their starting wealth and finds that they have enough for the gear they wanted, except they only have exactly half the cost of the masterwork armor they were hoping for - so they say "Hey DM, I stole this masterwork armor before the game started."

Do you A) say no, B) allow them to have the armor but take the gold they have left (equal to half the price), C) allow them to have the armor and not spend any gold on it at all, or D) some other less obvious response.?

I have to ask because I get the impression from you, and others sharing the position that crafting be allowed to provide a discount on goods, that the answer would be A despite the fact that B is exactly the justification used for allowing crafting discounts - that the player put points in the skill needed or took the feat needed and should get something out of that besides having that skill or feat for later use.

Sorry, but B is NOT related to the justification given. Disable Device is a perfectly useful skill that is used frequently in the course of adventuring. Giving a player with Disable Device the ability to 'steal' items outside of the adventure for the same net benefit as players with craft skills de-values the craft skills and removes far too much of the incentive to purchase crafting skills.

Crafting skills are downtime/roleplaying based, and only very rarely ever come into play during actual encounters. That said, as another person pointed out, when you're the GM, you get to decide, and maybe you'll let the person steal a starting item... and have that as a plot hook. But that means the party had better be okay with being on the wrong side of the law, since they're now aiding and abetting a known criminal.