Saern |
I would like to make the Craft skills more relevant in my campaigns. As it stands, they are only really good for making some non-magical gear which is completely irrelevant by 5th level. They are a very poor choice for PCs, and there's really nothing that the world's greatest swordsmith can do that Timmy the Wonderpeasant can't do if he's also got decent ranks, perhaps a Skill Focus, in the relevant skill. That bothers me. The solution I see can be glimsped in golemcrafting, one of the extremely few areas of the game which actually utilizes these skills. They require checks in woodworking, stonecrafting, blacksmithing, etc.
My proposal for making Craft skills more relevant is to do a similar thing for magic item creation. To make a magic item, a crafter would need to succeed on a skill check with the appropriate Craft skill. My thought is the formula for the DC might be 15 + caster level; a +5 sword would have a DC of 30. As with normal Craft usage, failure by 5 or more could mean loosing up to 1/3 the gold paid to craft the item in the first place.
Thus, a 15th level character (18 ranks + an assumed +2 relevant modifier) would be able to craft said +5 sword. That seems about right. A 12th level character would be able to hit the DC with the addition of the Skill Focus feat, but they would lack the caster level required.
Which brings me to my next inquiry: if I were to implement this, how should I integrate it with the item creation feats? Is it too much to require both a skill check and the feat in order to make a magic item? What if the two elements (feat and skill) could be contributed by different characters? Say a PC wizard has Craft Wondrous Item, but doesn't have Craft (jewelmaking and/or gemcutting), but they want to make a ring of protection. If they were able to go to a sufficiently skilled gemsmith or jewelmaker and let them contribute the check, would that balance the need to have both feat and skill ranks? I would impose a fee for getting assistance, of course, so that there was an incentive to keep the crafting all "in house," if possible.
Alternately, and let me express in advance that I am extremely hesitant about this option; what if the item creation feats were abandoned all together? What if the skill check were the major prerequisite, instead? I'm thinking about literature in which a skilled smith, no spellcaster in his own right, brings together powerful magical components and uses them in the forging of a blade or ring or amulate or whatever else, and creates an object of great magic as a result. In this case, the item's caster level would only determine the DC for crafting it, as well as the innate power of the item (to determine the caster level of any spell it produces or how it interacts with a dispel magic). The caster level would be otherwise totally divorced from the actual crafting process.
That has a certain appeal to it, but it complicates the traditional method of requiring a caster of X power (caster level) possessing spells X, Y, and Z to make the item. The complication to spells required is the bigger issue to my mind, as I really like that element of the current crafting system and wouldn't want to see it go; but I also like the thought of having smiths forge items of power without necessarily being archmages themselves. I may have to abandon this approach in favor of retaining the current vision of item making, which is more along the lines of the item's physical creation by a smith, and subsequent enchantment by a wizard, being two distinct and ultimately unrelated events. I do very much want to incorporate the Craft checks into item making, however.
Like it? Hate it? Let me know what you think!
Dragonchess Player |
An alternate method of item creation is the use of Craft Points from the d20 SRD. You could use the Craft Alchemical Item feat and appropriate Craft skill ranks to replace spellcasting level requirements (probably CL + 3 ranks in the skill). The spell requirement could be handled with an assistant, be provided by a magical item, or the use of special substances (i.e., red dragon blood for a flaming weapon, etc.).
minkscooter |
I would like to make the Craft skills more relevant in my campaigns. As it stands, they are only really good for making some non-magical gear which is completely irrelevant by 5th level.
Then why not allow creation of magical gear? Spells could ensure the desired magical result, but why not allow a chance for magic to arise purely from excellent craftsmanship? This is a fantasy game after all.
They are a very poor choice for PCs, and there's really nothing that the world's greatest swordsmith can do that Timmy the Wonderpeasant can't do if he's also got decent ranks, perhaps a Skill Focus, in the relevant skill. That bothers me. The solution I see can be glimsped in golemcrafting, one of the extremely few areas of the game which actually utilizes these skills. They require checks in woodworking, stonecrafting, blacksmithing, etc.
My proposal for making Craft skills more relevant is to do a similar thing for magic item creation. To make a magic item, a crafter would need to succeed on a skill check with the appropriate Craft skill. My thought is the formula for the DC might be 15 + caster level; a +5 sword would have a DC of 30. As with normal Craft usage, failure by 5 or more could mean loosing up to 1/3 the gold paid to craft the item in the first place.
I was thinking something more like DC 30 for a +1 item, and an additional 5 DC for each +1 beyond that, so DC 50 to craft a +5 item.
Thus, a 15th level character (18 ranks + an assumed +2 relevant modifier) would be able to craft said +5 sword. That seems about right. A 12th level character would be able to hit the DC with the addition of the Skill Focus feat, but they would lack the caster level required.
Which brings me to my next inquiry: if I were to implement this, how should I integrate it with the item creation feats? Is it too much to require both a skill check and the feat in order to make a magic item? What if the two elements (feat and skill) could be contributed by different characters? Say a PC wizard has Craft Wondrous Item, but doesn't have Craft (jewelmaking and/or gemcutting), but they want to make a ring of protection. If they were able to go to a sufficiently skilled gemsmith or jewelmaker and let them contribute the check, would that balance the need to have both feat and skill ranks? I would impose a fee for getting assistance, of course, so that...
An item creation feat could simply add +10 to the skill check. Each doubling of the cost in terms of time or money could add another +1 to the check (wasted in case of failure).
Saern |
Re: Varianor. Exactly. If you look at traditional folklore and mythology, the barrier between magic and mundane is pretty blurred. A blade made by an extraordinary smith, like Wayland, was special just because he was that good at making swords and knew how to do things that other smiths didn't. It was one long, linear line of skill. Modern fantasy seems to have more instances of a wizard enchanting that which is already made, though it does occur in mythology, as well. Perhaps I just need to allow both systems to exist simultaneously as an either/or situation; but I would really like to see them combined.
Re: DragonchessPlayer. Since you mention Craft (Alchemy) (well, technically a feat, but I'll take what I can get!), that's another project of mine: come up with more alchemical goods which remain relevant throughout the levels of the game so the skill isn't a total waste.
Back onto the main subject, I'll look into the craft points. But the last thing you mention really sparks my imagination. I really love power components, so the idea of using bits of creatures and essences and things like that for the crafting, above and beyond the base gold cost (which already represents power components and the like) seems like a great idea. Perhaps a system could be developed where creatures of a certain subtype (like [Fire]) of certain HD (linked to the item's caster level) would be required to fill in. Alternately, the "essences" and the like could be categorized as minor, lesser, greater, perhaps going so far as major and grand; the difference then depending on the HD of the creature it was harvested from. Perhaps, like in Oblivion's alchemy, each substance might serve as several things: balor scales could serve as greater fire, evil, and chaos essences or the like. I'm probably coming up with something waaaay too complicated, but it's really captured my imagination!
Re: Minkscooter. I prefer a formula resulting in lower DCs, because I'd like the craft checks to be accomplishable by characters of the same level as those who can craft item X under the current rules; i.e., a character has to be 9th level to make a +3 sword as the rules stand, so the craft DC should also be doable by around a 9th level character. If we assumed max ranks and a +2 relevant ability modifier, that comes to a +14 at 9th level, with a 50% chance of hitting DC 24. The craft check for a +3 sword would be 24 (15 + CL 9 = 24), so it works out perfectly.
As for having the item creation feats give a massive bonus to the skill, I think that might make things too easy. I'd either like to just abolish the feats all together, which I am very hesistant to do; or find a better way to integrate them with the Craft skills. I'm just worried (perhaps needlessly) about the game balance of requiring both checks (moreso about the game balance of abolishing the feats, if it comes to that). Also, I'm concerned about the implications for the system when it comes to in-game terms. Do I want magic items produced by wizard enchanters? Skilled smiths? Either/or, or both simultaneously? I'm just not sure right now.
I suppose, going along the power component route, I could require all the necessary elements to be provided by the creator himself, so a wizard could just use his spells; but a smith would have to get the power components. Possibilities and possibilities....
SirGeshko RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32 |
As for having the item creation feats give a massive bonus to the skill, I think that might make things too easy. I'd either like to just abolish the feats all together, which I am very hesistant to do; or find a better way to integrate them with the Craft skills. I'm just worried (perhaps needlessly) about the game balance of requiring both checks (moreso about the game balance of abolishing the feats, if it comes to that). Also, I'm concerned about the implications for the system when it comes to in-game terms. Do I want magic items produced by wizard enchanters? Skilled smiths? Either/or, or both simultaneously? I'm just not sure right now.
As far as what to do with the feats, you could make the Prerequisite: Caster Level X or Skill X
Then, in addition to the ability to craft items of that type, it would allow the character to treat one additional Craft skill as if they had the same number of ranks as their highest Craft skill. (See the feat Versatile Performer.)Or have them give a flat +1 or +2 bonus to EACH craft skill, that way, as the character takes more feats, they would gradually increase their competence in smithing items of all types.
I do like the essences idea though...
minkscooter |
If you look at traditional folklore and mythology, the barrier between magic and mundane is pretty blurred. A blade made by an extraordinary smith, like Wayland, was special just because he was that good at making swords
Love it. I would love to blur the line between magic and mundane.
Modern fantasy seems to have more instances of a wizard enchanting that which is already made, though it does occur in mythology, as well.
I really dislike the idea that any masterwork item serves equally well as a blank for magic item creation. I don't mind the idea of a wizard cooperating with a craftsman, but I think a wizard should craft his own items at least some of the time, and the system should provide incentives to encourage that.
Can you comment on intelligent magic items? I was wondering if the craftsman sometimes imprints his personality on an item, imparting life, possibly resulting in an item with an affinity for the maker and others with similar traits. Even very minor magics resulting from item affinity could add a lot of flavor I think.
minkscooter |
Re: Minkscooter. I prefer a formula resulting in lower DCs, because I'd like the craft checks to be accomplishable by characters of the same level as those who can craft item X under the current rules; i.e., a character has to be 9th level to make a +3 sword as the rules stand, so the craft DC should also be doable by around a 9th level character. If we assumed max ranks and a +2 relevant ability modifier, that comes to a +14 at 9th level, with a 50% chance of hitting DC 24. The craft check for a +3 sword would be 24 (15 + CL 9 = 24), so it works out perfectly.
Under the current rules the feat is mandatory. My idea was to make it possible but very hard without the feat, so that the incentive to take the feat is close to the same as what we currently have. Assuming +14 at 9th level, that's +24 with the item creation feat. For a DC 35 check, that's 50%, exactly what you're targeting. A wizard who wants to spend a lot of time in the lab and/or a lot of money could approach +10 without the feat (doubling time or money for each +1), so there's a real alternative to the feat.
EDIT: Actually, the DC for a +3 sword would be 40 under my proposal, making it 25% instead of 50%, so you're right, my system is a bit harder.
EDIT: On the plus side (depending on your point of view), a harder system helps keep magic items off the mass-production assembly line and leaves more room for interesting ways to provide bonuses on the skill check, such as obtaining rare items, working only under special conditions such as the light of the full moon, temporarily sacrificing hit points or ability points, etc.
I_Use_Ref_Discretion |
I would like to make the Craft skills more relevant in my campaigns. As it stands, they are only really good for making some non-magical gear which is completely irrelevant by 5th level. They are a very poor choice for PCs, and there's really nothing that the world's greatest swordsmith can do that Timmy the Wonderpeasant can't do if he's also got decent ranks
IMO, this problem is a direct result of magic items being far too prevalent in most campaigns I see or hear about. That ship may have sailed for your campaign already but if you had the chance to do it all over again, making magic items extremely rare, prohibitively costly to make, and truly treasured finds (with history and backstory), I believe you'd see the craft skills become correspondingly more valuable
Saern |
What about a Spellcraft check? What if taking the item crafting feats allowed you to substitue a Spellcraft check for the Craft skill check to create the item? It doesn't really address the issue of wizards making or not making their own items to enchant. Perhaps the DC could be higher using the feat than just using the skill; but if you made the base item yourself, you get a bonus on the roll which essentially negates the difference. So, to enchant an item via the feat, the DC may be 20 + caster level, which is 5 higher than the Craft DC. However, if you made the base item yourself, you get a +5 bonus, essentially negating it.
This system would allow both forms of item crafting, skill based and feat based, to co-exist. Fighters can make their own magic swords and armor; or the wizard could put an enchantment on it for him.
Scrolls, wands, and staves don't fall into the kinds of categories which the Craft skills typically cover. Perhaps they should only be able to be crafted by spellcasters with the appropriate feats, which make the Spellcraft check. It could be 5 lower (back to 15 + caster level, just like for Craft skills with other kinds of magic items made by Craft checks). That makes more sense, I think, for those kinds of items.
Item crafters could use the required spells, if they have them. It would probably be best to disallow sharing spells or using scrolls in this case, since and alternative method is being provided and might become underpowered if such free sharing is allowed. Alternately, they could pay a little more to purchase the essences in place of the spells, getting them from magic shops or freelance harvesters, etc. Finally, they would have the option to do some research and go harvest the essences themselves. They wouldn't necessarily have to come from slain creatures (as that may raise some questions of morality); but perhaps could also be harvested from other magic items (a la WoW's disenchant ability). Thus, rather than selling magic items at some magical Wal-Mart, parties could disenchant those they didn't plan to use so that the item crafters could use the essences to re-enchant their own equipment. Everything stays in-house that way.
If the essences are priced right, then the cost to create a magic item, as listed in the DMG, could be completely abolished. A roughly equivalent price would be paid instead to purchase the essences; or if the party went through the steps to harvest the materials themselves, effectively paying in time and effort, then they could get the items, in terms of gold, for free.
This may require a bit of time and work on my part to bring around properly, particularly regarding the essence pricing (if I choose to pursue that option). I don't know what to say about intelligent magic items at this point. I'll need to give it some thought (and would, of course, welcome any suggestions). Thanks, all!
MrFish |
One thing I've wondered about regarding this stuff is characters like gnomes and dwarves--for fun I had a dwarvish character tormented now and then by humans who wanted him to "build them stuff" all the time. He couldn't. Didn't know how. We enjoyed playing it up as a racial stereotype. But in fact isn't that part of the mythology as well? Don't certain cultures and character types have such affiliations? On that basis I think that you're on to something.
Saern |
Very much so. The Norse/Germanic dwarves and dark elves (which are essentially synonymous; and those dwarves are the direct inspiration for modern D&D dwarves) lived underground and were the master smiths. There were gods like Wayland, and Hephaestos among the Greeks, and several Celtic deities (whom I'm not on a first-name basis with like the others) which were all master smiths. Tolkien himself portrayed some magic in much the same way; Aragorn's sword, Anduril, the Flame of the West, was forged; not "enchanted" like we think of now. In D&D terms, it was absolutely a magic item. But in Middle-Earth terms, it was "just" an extremely well-crafted, and hence powerful, sword.
I think allowing both systems to co-exist in the form described above will provide both the narrative qualities I desire in the game, as well as choice and options for players.
MrFish |
In my setting all magical items are either crafted, granted or are of alien origin.
The old races apparently wove powerful spells into the crafting of items; much of this art has been lost with the decline or collapse of these old races. So you hear of this regarding the blades of Gondolin in Tolkien for example, I use a similar kind of mythology.
Part of this is no doubt because forging a really good weapon was such an extraordinary craft. It's a cool idea to bring that to bear in the game.
I find as well that this makes pcs treasure things even more. For example for a pc in my setting to have an elvish blade and armour signifies that they have something very special. For them to have something like a wizard's staff, flying carpet or figurine of wondrous power is amazing, unique and wonderful. For a pc to be able to create such things is on another level altogether.
minkscooter |
All the magic item crafting feats have a caster level prerequisite. How about a feat that lets you ignore that? Or, assuming +10 on the Craft check to make a magic item at DC 25 plus DC 5 per +1 enchantment, how about allowing the feats to anyone without the caster level requirement, but at half the bonus (only +5 on the Craft check)?
I really think feats are a good way to justify the feasibility of magic item creation. Why be eager to get rid of them?
Low DCs for magic item creation seem like a bad idea. Why should it be possible for anyone with a few skill ranks to create a magic item?
EDIT: Given the OP's example of DC 24 to craft a +3 sword, it would be possible for a 1st level character with Craft as a class skill to succeed on a roll of 20.
Matthew Morris RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8 |
Green Ronin's Advancved Game Master's Guide does have rules for 'beyond masterwork' items and enchanting properties of same.
The ones I remember off my head (I don't have the PDF)
Balanced (+1 to damage)
Dwarfcraft (Additional hardness/HP)
Elfcraft (15% lighter, I believe finessable)
Some kind of super masterwork (allows a non-magical +1 property, like keen, or flaming assuming you have some kind of oil, etc)
I think there were others. In my home brew world, there's the 'Dead sea' (so named because the ocean has huge dead magic zones) so a masterwork, balanced, non-magical keen dwarfcraft sabre would be worth a pirate's weight in gold.
Hope these help.
Saern |
All the magic item crafting feats have a caster level prerequisite. How about a feat that lets you ignore that? Or, assuming +10 on the Craft check to make a magic item at DC 25 plus DC 5 per +1 enchantment, how about allowing the feats to anyone without the caster level requirement, but at half the bonus (only +5 on the Craft check)?
I really think feats are a good way to justify the feasibility of magic item creation. Why be eager to get rid of them?
Low DCs for magic item creation seem like a bad idea. Why should it be possible for anyone with a few skill ranks to create a magic item?
EDIT: Given the OP's example of DC 24 to craft a +3 sword, it would be possible for a 1st level character with Craft as a class skill to succeed on a roll of 20.
I suppose I am hesitant to make the feats necessary for skill-based item creation because it feels like a double requirement.
DM: "Sure, the craft skills let you make your own magic items now! If you take the feats, that is."
Player: "You mean now I have to invest skill points and take the feats, rather than just take the feats, and this all comes with a chance of failure whereas it used to be guaranteed? Gee, thanks."
I'm a pro-player DM, and don't want to create a situation that is unfavorable to them just for some vision of mine regarding narrative quality in the game.
I also feel I'm doing this largely to increase the usefulness of the Craft skills, and ultimately requiring a feat to perform these actions anyway seems to undermine that endeavor in my eyes.
Beside, it doesn't truly matter if a 1st level character has a 5% chance of hitting the DC; they still have to provide 1/3 of the item's cost, which is 6,000gp for a +3 enhancement. A character isn't supposed to have that much until around 5th level or so. I suppose then a character might be "in danger" of making such a powerful item too early, but they would have to blow the majority of all their funds to do so.
A possible fix is to require a certain number of skill ranks before the thing can even be attempted. See bardic music. There's no check required to gain or perform the abilities. You simply have to have X ranks in the right skill, and you can do it. It's a little bit out of keeping with D&D tradition, but it would take the possibility of failure out of the equation while still allowing non-spellcasters to craft magic items and absolutely controlling the level at which you gained access to making new weapon enchantments. It would be similar to the crafting system in the over-often maligned WoW, which I actually preferred to D&D's system.
That being said, along with my stance as pro-player, I would actually really like to leave the roll in the game. By allowing characters to take 10, the possibility of failure is still removed for those who wait until the time they are "supposed" to be able to make a given item. For those who are impatient or precocious, there is a chance of failure.
minkscooter |
Balanced (+1 to damage)
Dwarfcraft (Additional hardness/HP)
Elfcraft (15% lighter, I believe finessable)
Some kind of super masterwork (allows a non-magical +1 property, like keen, or flaming assuming you have some kind of oil, etc)
These all have great flavor, and I would like to see them added to the game, but they fall short of satisfying anyone who wants to blur the line between mundane and magical and allow exceptional craftsmanship to result in actual magic.
minkscooter |
I suppose I am hesitant to make the feats necessary for skill-based item creation because it feels like a double requirement.
Not at all. The Craft skill would still allow you to do everything it currently allows you to do. The feats allow you to do something with the skill that you couldn't normally do (create magic items). The feats aren't even required, since there are other ways to put the DCs within reach (e.g. time and money, rare "essences", etc). In this way we blur the line between mundane and magic without erasing it.
Beside, it doesn't truly matter if a 1st level character has a 5% chance of hitting the DC; they still have to provide 1/3 of the item's cost, which is 6,000gp for a +3 enhancement. A character isn't supposed to have that much until around 5th level or so. I suppose then a character might be "in danger" of making such a powerful item too early, but they would have to blow the majority of all their funds to do so.
Actually, I wasn't even including a bonus for high Int, so a highly intelligent 1st level character (Int 14) would succeed at DC 24 on a roll of 18 or better (15%). At 5th level, the odds rise to 35%.
If you're careful about doling out treasure, you can rely on character wealth to limit magic item creation. However, the skill does matter if we're envisioning a system that captures the idea of a character like Wayland the Smith. The skill may be even more important than the materials. I don't think the raw materials of a +3 sword cost 6,000 gp, unless you're assuming precious metals and gems in the hilt.
A possible fix is to require a certain number of skill ranks before the thing can even be attempted. See bardic music.
Similar to requiring a feat with a caster level prereq before the thing can even be attempted.
That being said, along with my stance as pro-player, I would actually really like to leave the roll in the game. By allowing characters to take 10, the possibility of failure is still removed for those who wait until the time they are "supposed" to be able to make a given item. For those who are impatient or precocious, there is a chance of failure.
I share your sentiment here. I would never allow a crafter to take 20, since crafting something is already supposed to take a long time. Since the conditions for taking 10 are also assumed in order to have any chance of successfully crafting something (plenty of time, minimal distractions), I wouldn't allow taking 10 either. Craft has special rules for trying again, including penalties in terms of time and materials depending on degree of failure, so with enough patience, you will eventually succeed, assuming it is possible and you have enough resources. It's a gamble to embark on a project where delays and wasted materials are probable.
minkscooter |
What about a Spellcraft check? What if taking the item crafting feats allowed you to substitue a Spellcraft check for the Craft skill check to create the item?
I think that falls outside the scope of Spellcraft. Instead, I would allow Knowledge (arcana) or Knowledge (divine) to discover ways of boosting your Craft check, such as discovering appropriate "essences", the right crafting conditions (e.g. continuous music, special location, whatever), or sacrifices that encourage the desired magic. These discoveries could all be plot hooks to start new quests in your campaign.
If spells are required in the making of a particular item, then I think Spellcraft can help you apply the correct spells in the correct way.