Crafting TPK

[Ferious Thune]

From what I can see, and as others have said, the player had the crafting rules right.

Keep in mind that you can only craft a single magic item each day, though, so even at a 500gp cost, he could only make 1 endure elements bracelet per day, and that's with a minimum 4 hour block of time spent dedicated to crafting. If it's an adventuring day, he'd only make 2 hours progress per day.

I do think, too, that as someone mentioned, he'd need a masterwork bracelet for each one first. Someone can correct me if this is wrong, but I don't think craft wonderous item is meant to include the cost/time of crafting the mundane item that is enchanted. It's just for the enchanting part.

And if you really want your mind blown, check out this thread to see how many weeks each of those bracelets would take to craft, despite the fact that they only take half a day to enchant.

[DM_Blake]

They actually take a full day to enchant. The enchantment time is based on the "base" price which is the sale price listed in the book (not the crafting materials price).

This can be rushed, allowing him to get the same amount of work in 4 hours, but that increases the DC by +5. Of course, the DC is so low that rushing won't be a problem. It's just that it must be one or the other, a full day at normal DC or a half day at +5 DC.

[Ferious Thune]

Looked through it again, and I may be wrong about needing a masterwork bracelet first. The only relevant line I could find is:

Crafting Magic Items wrote:

Armor, shields, weapons, and items with value independent of their magically enhanced properties add their item cost to the market price.

But my point is still somewhat valid. Crafting a masterwork longsword is going to take much longer than enchanting it.

Thanks DM_Blake. I did, indeed, have the crafting time mixed up. Still only 1 per day, either way.

[Makarion]

Joesi wrote:

While I certainly agree that it's ridiculous the DC only increases by 5 to not cast the spell —or rather that an item can be created at all without casting the spell— overall I don't think it's actually a big deal, since gold is really the limiting factor. They couldn't really make anything too strong or otherwise it would be out of their budget.

I found that the biggest issue to deal with was rather whether or not X character would know of X item they wanted to craft, or even X item that they wanted to buy.
It all seems so meta-gamey when players are having their characters craft/buy everything that's perfectly suitable for their situation as if all those items in existence were common-knowledge.

As far as I know there's no real way to deal with this slight issue though, aside from DM just overruling certain obviously strange requests (like maybe crafting a poison that only exists in a certain area they're no where near)

One houserule that keeps much of the crafting rules intact but rebalances things at least a little is to increase the penalty for skipped spell prerequisites to 5 + level of the missing spell. So a missing Owl's Wisdom is DC +7, and a missing Wish is DC +14. It's probably still too generous (and that's without even going into the "wealth by level" nonsense), but it's simple. Most players like clear-cut rules.

[Diego Rossi]

Anburaid wrote:

Item CLs are also kinda funky. They function as being part of DC of crafting an item as well as a measure of how hard the item is to dispel. For non-spell required items (not potions, wands, scrolls), the CL is not a hard requirement and can be bypassed with the +5 DC. Thus a pearl of power (1st level) could be crafted by a 3rd level wizard even though its CL is 17 (though at some considerable risk of it being cursed, DC 27 and all).

The DC depend on the Caster Level of the item. If you make a 1st level pearl of power with a caster level of you have a DC of 8. The only requirement of the item beside Craft wondrous item is "creator must be able to cast spells of the spell level to be recalled", so at 3rd level you don't need to add +5 to the DC to make that pearl.

@Heimdall666
My previous post was about making items with unusual effects. The rules are clear about the possibility to bypass the lack of the right spell.
For balance reasons in my campaign I don't allow "overcasting" when making a magic item, i.e. crafting a magic item with a caster level higher than your caster level or a spell that full caster of your level (or the appropriate caster for specialized spells) could not cast.
Generally it make little difference for the player characters, but it make a big difference for the world kingdoms.
With the appropriate skillset and a lot of founds a 5th level wizard could make a gem of unlimited wishes, or a statue casting greater magic weapon and magical vestment at caster level 20 on the weapon placed on its plinth an unlimited number of times every day.
Enjoy fighting a local militia with +5 weapon, armors and shield that become normal items after 20 hours.

[Tarantula]

Ferious Thune wrote:

Looked through it again, and I may be wrong about needing a masterwork bracelet first. The only relevant line I could find is:

Crafting Magic Items wrote:

Armor, shields, weapons, and items with value independent of their magically enhanced properties add their item cost to the market price.

But my point is still somewhat valid. Crafting a masterwork longsword is going to take much longer than enchanting it.

Thanks DM_Blake. I did, indeed, have the crafting time mixed up. Still only 1 per day, either way.

"To create a wondrous item, a character usually needs some sort of equipment or tools to work on the item. She also needs a supply of materials, the most obvious being the item itself or the pieces of the item to be assembled. The cost for the materials is subsumed in the cost for creating the item. Wondrous item costs are difficult to determine. Refer to Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values and use the item prices in the item descriptions as a guideline. Creating an item costs half the market value listed."

So, in the 50% cost you pay in materials, you are paying for the MW bracelet or whatever to enchant. But in this case, you aren't heading down to magic-mart to buy the materials, you are trying to do it on the fly. He would need to craft the bracelets (or fabricate?) before he could start the enchanting.

[Heimdall666]

@ Diego Rossi: The gut reaction most of the Player-GMs had at the table was game balance because of the relative ease of semi-custom items. The ironic part about this whole discussion is that not one of our characters in any game run by any of the GMs has rewarded anyone more than 10000gp worth of anything, nor have our characters bypassed level 7-8. Its very reminiscent of kids being told they cant use markers because they have all these crayons to use first. I haven't had a +2 weapon in 4 years.

I went to the market and bought masterwork jewelry for my item, because I'm fussy and an elven princess, but the others used basic rough hewn items.

[Diego Rossi]

I am used to campaigns lasting to level 16+, so our mileage varies a lot.
In the Carrion Crown campaign where I am a player we are level 6 and we have already found 2 +2 equivalent weapons.

[Bullfrogg2000]

Hello I'm not sure if Ito late to weigh in on this but is it being said that you do not NEED the item to be crafted, spells used, or the casterer lvl? All you need is gold and time? Isn't that a little bit like divine creation something out of nothing ( except gold that is)
If money and time are the only reins for this then by controlling the flow of magicked items aren't you penalizing the non crafting players? If you give the crafter limmited wealth then that can only make items for them selves or a limmited few and rose few will be reliant almost Sony on the crafter.
And as for the caster lvl I see a lot of people say its only to set the DC. Now it does say it is used for that purpose but not solely. The CL affects other aspects of the item as well as being THE CASTER LEVEL for creation. A spell casters class is their caster lvl. A item as far as I've read can't be made lower than its minimum caster lvl or at a lvl higher than the spell casters caster level. So a lvl 3 wiz doesn't have lv 5 mojo and thus can't imbue more power than they have into a item.
Also If the CL was only to set the DC it would be just that the DC and a +5 would not need to be added to it to get the DC it may have multiple jobs but it doesn't lose it's base definition of a caster level. ( in the book magic section)
As for the + 5 DC I have found two area that say you must have the requirements and only the one DC section that people contest the requirements. The way I read the txt is that if you have a secondary sorce such as a spell or a friend helping you meet the requirement then you add 5 for each thing that they provide.
I believe this because of two thing. In the wounderous items creatio it say that you prepare the spells an they AUTOMATICLY go off each day of the crafting process which would say to me that casting the spell you self is easier than having a friend cast it hence the + DC.
Also with each day burning the spell slot you would need to roll your spell craft every day to emulate the spell but the creation rules say you need only make one roll at the end.
It seems to me that most of the confusion of crafting comes from the DC wording. And I think it is just that the DC not the rule on requirements and materials needed which are stated again in multiple places.
I have played a crafter class meeting the material and CL components and spell requirements and it works fine I though. You just can't make ever thing with little to no failure at lvl three. You mean I have to wait to lvl 15 to make a mulet of planes(which a crafter lvl three spell craft 7 with MW tool +2 has a 25% chance of making or a 100% of making with hero points if you you the plus five. Not allowing that without some one who can cast plane shift doesn't seem unfair to me bu if I'm wrong please let me know and I'd appreciate if it was backed up with something else than the one line in the DC description.

[seebs]

Heymitch wrote:

seebs wrote:

Decanter of endless water is CL 9, prerequisite spell Control Water. DC to create is 14. If you don't have Control Water (which is a 6th level spell for a wizard), it's +5. If you can't do caster level 9, it's +5. If you want to accelerate, that's another +5. So that's a total target of 29.

Actually, that's wrong. The CL 9 is not a prerequisite, and is not listed on the requirement line of the item description. You can create a Decanter of Endless Water at any CL of 7 or greater (the minimum caster level required to cast the requisite spell Control Water). The listed CL 9 is only an example of a ready-made Decanter of Endless Water, and it could be higher or lower.

Here's the relevant text:

Core Rulebook p.549 wrote:

A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell.

Ooh, interesting point. Only for a wizard, Control Water is level 6, so would I need to make it CL11? Or would it be easier to do it at CL 7 using the cleric spell, and only need a +5 DC for not having that spell?

[Majuba]

Anburaid wrote:

One thing that doesn't come immediately across for most people reading the crafting rules is this. You ALWAYS want to be taking 10. Not taking 10 gives you a chance to create a cursed item, and then become that cursed item's first victim.

Any DM at all concerned with crafting should never allow taking 10 on item creation. The DCs were arrived at, essentially, by seeing what a relatively dedicated crafter could achieve, meeting every pre-requisite, without a chance of failure. If you're not a dedicated crafter (max spellcraft/craft skill), or you're adding +5 DC to avoid, you should have some chance of failure. Check the Beta discussion forums for item creation if you're curious - quite an interesting thread on the topic around Nov-Dec of '08.

Heymitch/Seebs:
You do not have to be high enough caster level to cast a spell pre-requisite. The *item* must be created at that level (this is primarily so that you don't create L.1 Fireball wands that do 1d6 in a 20' radius and such, or L.1 scrolls of Teleport, etc.). That sets the inital DC (5+CL) - that's it.

Rings of Wishes, etc., are not spell-trigger/completion - otherwise a Fighter couldn't use one. If a crafter can make the minimum DC 27 check to make it (and has the ton of cash necessary), go for it. Not very different from someone with a huge UMD buying a scroll. There isn't really a cost savings involved (cost includes the full spell component cost, cast or not).

[Gallo]

Majuba wrote:

Any DM at all concerned with crafting should never allow taking 10 on item creation. The DCs were arrived at, essentially, by seeing what a relatively dedicated crafter could achieve, meeting every pre-requisite, without a chance of failure. If you're not a dedicated crafter (max spellcraft/craft skill), or you're adding +5 DC to avoid, you should have some chance of failure. Check the Beta discussion forums for item creation if you're curious - quite an interesting thread on the topic around Nov-Dec of '08.

The base premise of magic item creation in Pathfinder is that it is a straightforward process. If you have the feat, money and time you can craft provided you can achieve the required DC. Why shouldn't a crafter take 10? Should a character not be allowed to take 10 in other skills if they haven't maxed out that particular skill?

[Pizza Lord]

I've been trying to wrap my head around this for a bit and I have to say that the crafting PC is misreading the intent. Bullfrogg2000 seems to have the idea right, but it might have been a bit hard to read.

Quote:

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.

The way I read it, a creator can have assistance with his item as long as he has the actual creation feat. He can have someone else assist him that meets the other requirements, such as being an elf, having 5 ranks in climb, casting a required spell, etc. (except for creating scrolls, potions, wands, and the like, which the creator must have the spell for.) This is likely to prevent the easy access to rare spells from classes, like PrCs. Now casters can't just pass out scrolls with rare spells (like Slime Hurl) without the one with the spell knowledge actually making the scroll.

For each such requirement that the creator does not possess, the DC increases by 5. That doesn't mean any prerequisites are ignored, they all must still be provided, but for every one not provided by the creator themselves, increases the difficulty.

So in order to create a ring of swimming, the creator must have Forge Ring and 5 ranks in Swim, then make a Spellcraft check at DC 7 (5 + 2 CL). If the creator doesn't have 5 ranks of Swim, he can have assistance from someone who does, but then his Spellcraft DC becomes 12. He does NOT get to handwave the requirements away.

I cannot believe that the intent of the ruling was to make creating a Ring of One Wish be just as easy as creating a Ring of Three Wishes or a Ring of Ten Wishes as long as you don't actually have the requirements to make the ring in the first place.

If that were the case, the creator of a Ring of Three Wishes could state that since he isn't actually using the Wish spell requirement then he doesn't need to spend the material component (which is necessary for items that effectively create the same spell). So now he's saving 75,000 gp which would normally be added to the cost, but even if you did try and find some way to say that it's still a base cost, he wouldn't need to expend the three 9th level slots (ie. keep them free and unused) during the entire length of item creation, which someone who actually meets the requirement would have to do (or at least, the person assisting the creator would have to do). Because to do it the other way, your creator may not even have access to 9th level slots to lose access to, and that is clearly unbalanced.

[Ascalaphus]

Majuba wrote:

Any DM at all concerned with crafting should never allow taking 10 on item creation. The DCs were arrived at, essentially, by seeing what a relatively dedicated crafter could achieve, meeting every pre-requisite, without a chance of failure. If you're not a dedicated crafter (max spellcraft/craft skill), or you're adding +5 DC to avoid, you should have some chance of failure. Check the Beta discussion forums for item creation if you're curious - quite an interesting thread on the topic around Nov-Dec of '08.

I direct your attention to the FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Crafting and Take 10: Can I take 10 on the Spellcraft check to craft a magic item?

Yes.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 02/22/13

[coyote6]

Ascalaphus wrote:

I direct your attention to the FAQ:

Yeah, I think I don't like that ruling, as it means no PC will ever bother rolling Spellcraft to make an item. If 10+their Spellcraft modifier isn't high enough, they won't bother trying (50/50 odds or worse are a bad bet). And that is nearly as boring as the 3e magic item creation rules. I'm not sure it's worth the word count spent on them, if it all boils down to "you can make any item with a (modified) caster level of your skill modifier+5 or less; caster level is +5 per missing prereq, and +5 to halve the time."

Plus, no PC will ever actually make a cursed item. I guess they all come from dumb NPCs.

[Ascalaphus]

Well, on the one hand there's almost every week some GM complaining that it's not cool that the PC crafters always take 10. But from a player's perspective - would you really take a GAMBLE with say, 25% of your current WBL? If it goes wrong, does the tooth fairy refill your gold pouch a little while later, or are you just totally screwed?

That said, the +5 per missing prerequisite - when playing a Druid with crafting it does actually matter, because when you don't have Intelligence as a casting stat, your Spellcraft doesn't go nearly as high.

As for cursed items - many of those are totally OP, if the PC knows what item it is. Many of them have really nasty abilities with no saving throw, based on the assumption that the user doesn't know. But if you use it on enemies it's a nuclear weapon. So I'm not crying if those don't pop up; I think they're not a piece of game design to be proud of.

---

I'm not saying I'm wild about the current item creation rules. I'm just pointing out how they work and some of the why they work that way.

[Hawktitan]

Any DM that lets a PC make a cursed items is asking for trouble.

I intentionally fail my Dust of disappearance check to create Dust of Sneezing and Choking!

Please never allow this. Failed checks should make useless rubble.

[Aasif Al Jamyl]

Honestly, I've never seen a problem with the +5 to the DC for missing prerequisites. GMs can be fairly draconian in how they allow it to be implemented.

For example, a GM could borrow from the UMD rules to build his or her guideline for 'missing' requisites.

Modifying the original example slightly, consider a cleric wanting to craft an item that is built on a Bard-only spell. Not having the spell is a clear +5. The GM could then add 'emulating a class' and 'emulating a high charisma' as two more requisites making the final DC 15 higher than normal!

At this point, the Cleric might be better off spending their time and gold researching the spell (praying to their god for access) in order to bypass all 3 DC bumpers.

Remember, the GM is the final authority on everything. If a player is so completely out of sorts by some aspect of the game being handled in a manner different from their own understanding then they should probably exercise their right to play with a different group of people. Generally, there's little reason for things to get that far off the road. In this case if the PC was designed to craft and craft and craft some more, and the player now believes that they took these limited resource options under false pretenses (i.e. the 'surprise' difference in interpretation or understanding of the crafting rules) then perhaps they can be appeased with a rebuild / retraining option?

TBH, the rules and rulings that I have seen cause problems are:

1. (minor) Taking 10 on crafting checks

I agree with many who have posted in this thread, there SHOULD be risk involved in this process. Eventually, risk is mitigated, but it should never be zero for PCs. An NPC artisan that does nothing but craft? Maybe they've earned the benefits of Skill Mastery through years of dedication and practice, but PCs craft on the side. It's never their reason for being, and mastery should not be automatic.

2. (minor) +5 DC to craft items in half the normal time

Given the number of Adventure Paths (Paizo, published and private) that have storylines that provide absolutely no latitude (in terms of time or other resources), or extremely limited latitude — for the pursuit of personal interests, side missions, or, yes, crafting, I understand why this rule has to exist.

IMHO, it should only be allowed when it is the ONLY option. In other words, it should not be for flexibility. It should be invoked if there is simply no other way PCs will every be able to craft anything more significant than a scroll.

(FWIW, I've seen a player argue that they could use this option to get 16 hours of crafting done in one day, which is clearly not what the rules say or allow, but some players see rules the same way they see people — as things to twist and manipulate for personal advantage no matter how much they have to mangle or abuse that 'resource' in the process.)

3. (MAJOR!) -x% cost to produce an item with limitations or conditions

(For example, crafting an item so that it only functions for a specific race or class.)

Players try to abuse (and often succeed at abusing) the h-e-double-hockey-sticks out of this rule! IMHO, it's a bad rule, period. I understand the intent, and I STILL think it's a bad rule. (Master Craftsman is a much better way to accomplish the same goal.)

Why should an orc smith-shaman be enabled to mass produce magic weapons and armor that only work for orcs? Making these items unusable by the enemies of orcs (elves, dwarves, and lots of other medium-sized humanoids) is a PLUS NOT A SHORTCUT!!! When you think about it, it should cost MORE to make your tools useless when they fall into the hands of the enemy!

The ways that players abuse this rule are legion.

It's one thing for a player to reduce the cost of the items they craft for themselves by making them dependent upon their own race, class or alignment qualities, but why should they be able to craft items for races, classes and alignments that don't match their own more quickly than they could a standard item? Shouldn't that be harder or more costly? The current rule doesn't make sense in terms of the economics of magic, but the rule stands as is in the spirit of teamwork and party politics.

A GM would be well within their rights to apply ad hoc +5 boosts to the crafting DCs anytime a PC wanted to craft an item usable only by ANOTHER race, class and/or alignment. Unfortunately, that discourages teamwork and would augment wealth imbalances within parties.

Another problem with this rule is that it is counterproductive in the long run. How many times has a PC had to borrow gear from an ally because their own gear was useless for a given situation, or their own useful gear was exhausted, sundered, or for some reason currently inaccessible? If everyone's best gear is cheaply and quickly made to function properly only for their owner, borrowing gear suddenly becomes pointless, or at the very least requires a Use Magic Device check to emulate this, that and the other thing! Is the 8 Int, LN Human Fighter really going to be able to make a series of UMD checks when he borrows the CG Elf Ranger's back-up bow?

The worst abuse of which I know I fortunately didn't experience personally. A player was using the crafting shortcut rule to reduce the cost and craft time for items his PC crafted for other PCs. The abuse part is that he didn't tell anyone that he was cutting corners and charged them as though he was creating the item by the book. So, party members were getting their items at half cost (and were happy until the truth came out) AND the crafter was making a tidy profit at the same time. I suppose that's one way to "win the arms race"...against your own allies!

I hope your situation resolved or resolves amiably.

[Ascalaphus]

@Aasif: your UMD story is completely homebrew though. RAW isn't super-easy to understand, but what you describe is a total fabrication by the GM.

[LazarX]

Heimdall666 wrote:

We have experience in many game systems and item creation, Shadowrun, Earthdawn (the best really), etc, Pathfinder is one of the few so far that is actually supportive of a crafter class. Earthdawn allows you to imbue your items as you adventure making them singular to you, which I think is a really great way to roleplay and use magic items.

Earthdawn is unique in that you didn't "craft" magic items for others, rather that you made items legendary by their association with you and that association would give them magical properties which would only function for you. Some of them were very generic items that would only require a simple bonding, others much more involved.

[Vincent Takeda]

And again, crafting an item that grants wishes is a 'spell activation item' like scrolls and potions and wands, where the casting prerequisites cannot be bypassed by the +5dc check, so lets not get all zany about bypassing the spell use and material component costs for wish items again.

I would also routinely mess up dust of disappearance checks. I love that cursed dust like nobody's business. Maybe I should make smoe low level simulacrums to constantly fail in my new 'pocket dimension dust factory'

[DM_Blake]

Vincent Takeda wrote:

And again, crafting an item that grants wishes is a 'spell activation item' like scrolls and potions and wands, where the casting prerequisites cannot be bypassed by the +5dc check, so lets not get all zany about bypassing the spell use and material component costs for wish items again.

They are? Since when?

Ring of Three Wishes. Usable by EVERYONE, not just someone with Wish on their class list. Rings are not intrinsically spell-completion items, and nothing specific in that one that overrides this.

[Bullfrogg2000]

My personal opinion would be to remove the paragraphs containing the DC calls and rules for magic item creation. By doing that you simplify the creation procces as it will clearly be spelled out in the wounderous or ring creation sections.
And it will tackle the biggest issue I see with the DC which is the meta game. I'm sure there are some DMs much better than I at micro managing and can make all of the rolls that should be made secretly. ( it does add to the game play to be able to do so) But I usually like to let the players handle such things. If a door isn't unlocked they know it but I do find it hard to believe that they would use a magic item knowing that they failed in the curse range.
Though cool that a player could make a cursed item I would definitely see it getting a little meta gamey in such a situation. I'd much prefer to randomly through the cursed item in the game secretly my self to shake things up a little as the dm. You know giving them a little side quest to break up the action or just a comic relief.
I also believe the best way to adjust a rule is to try and make as simple as possible. That way you can eliminate and confusion that already exists without adding anything to it your self

[Pizza Lord]

Vincent Takeda wrote:

And again, crafting an item that grants wishes is a 'spell activation item' like scrolls and potions and wands, where the casting prerequisites cannot be bypassed by the +5dc check, so lets not get all zany about bypassing the spell use and material component costs for wish items again.

You are incorrect. A ring of three wishes is NOT a potion, spell-trigger, or spell-completion item. The fact that the use of the item emulates the casting of the wish spell means that it does require the 25,000 gp diamond component (even though the ring uses rubies to track the wishes). Otherwise, it wouldn't even require that.

As it is, you can receive assistance with the wish spell component of the ring, and it would only be +5 to the DC regardless of how many wishes the item allows. Typically, the assistant would lose access to a spell slot for each spell required for as long as the object was being made as well as the cost for the material components. This would be balance. Allowing the requirement to be bypassed by someone who doesn't even have a spell slot to give up is clearly an unfair advantage and makes not having a requirement outweigh actually having gone through the effort to get it.

So yes, it can get broken and zany to allow a fast and loose reading of the rules without actual comprehension, even if you still somehow leave the material component cost in the item crafting cost even though there's no logical way to explain how you should be paying for a non-cast spell.

That's why there is no way to create an item without meeting the prerequisite or the costs. You can receive assistance (and take the +5 Spellcraft DC) for requirements other than spells for potion, spell-completion, and spell-trigger items. You cannot ignore any requirement. Otherwise it's clearly open to abuse, and I don't believe any developer will admit that their intention was to allow such abuse, nor do I read it in the actual writing (though I would have made it clearer).

Quote:

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created.

The rules go out of their way to add this line, otherwise it wouldn't have been needed at all. The paragraph could have continued without it, but its inclusion is important.

The rules then go on to explain what some of the requirements are and which ones can be fulfilled with assistance, as well as how assistance affects the Spellcraft DC.

Quote:

Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.

[Heimdall666]

I personally think that the GM should either make the player roll a concealed die behind a screen, roll himself, or have the crafter roll a pregen list of 20 rolls for crafting failure/success. This would allow the crafter the luxury of taking 10 but not knowing for sure if it was cursed or not. It could also be used for a list of well, you took 10 but the local magic warped it into a cursed item anyway. I mean, where is a better place to make a ring of protection from lightning than on a mountaintop in a thunderstorm wearing fullplate banging on a anvil with a metal hammer?

Alternate crafting I have allowed included finding rare materials that enhanced the item beyond the requirements, so by adding for example "An Angel's Tear" might add to the crafting skill check, or make it extra holy or GM wacky in a good way.

[Avh]

Pizza Lord wrote:

As it is, you can receive assistance with the wish spell component of the ring, and it would only be +5 to the DC regardless of how many wishes the item allows. Typically, the assistant would lose access to a spell slot for each spell required for as long as the object was being made as well as the cost for the material components. This would be balance. Allowing the requirement to be bypassed by someone who doesn't even have a spell slot to give up is clearly an unfair advantage and makes not having a requirement outweigh actually having gone through the effort to get it.

So yes, it can get broken and zany to allow a fast and loose reading of the rules without actual comprehension, even if you still somehow leave the material component cost in the item crafting cost even though there's no logical way to explain how you should be paying for a non-cast spell.

That's why there is no way to create an item without meeting the prerequisite or the costs. You can receive assistance (and take the +5 Spellcraft DC) for requirements other than spells for potion, spell-completion, and spell-trigger items. You cannot ignore any requirement. Otherwise it's clearly open to abuse, and I don't believe any developer will admit that their intention was to allow such abuse, nor do I read it in the actual writing (though I would have made it...

I think you're confusing 2 things.

Assistance is when someone else provide the requirement (or with exterior sources, like scrolls for example) : it can be done for any items, and do not provoke a +5 DC to the craft check, except for the crafting feat.

No requirement is when the crafter does not meet the requirement at all. Depending on the item, when the prerequisite is not met it means +5 DC to the craft check, or can even make the craft impossible (absence of the spell for a potion, scroll or wand for example).

To take your example of the Ring of Wishes :
A cleric tries to craft one.
He needs those things :
- 97500 gp in components
- The feat Forge ring (prerequisite, cannot be bypassed by +5 DC)
- The spell Wish (1 per day for 120 days ; Prerequisite, can be bypassed by +5 DC).

The feat cannot be bypassed. If the cleric does not have it, he can't even try to craft one.
The spell can be bypassed, or granted from the wizard from the group. If the wizard cast it, there is no augmentation of the crafting DC (because the prerequisite is met). If the wizard or the cleric or anyone else use Scroll of wish each day (which would be stupid, but anyway), it's the same.
If the cleric is all by himself, and cannot provide the Wish spell, he must increase the DC of the craft check by +5.

[seebs]

With an 11th level wizard/arcane-trickster, I don't actually care about the "take 10" thing, because nothing remotely close to affordable for me is hard enough that I can't do the +5 accelerated casting DC even on a 1. Fundamentally, a DC of 5+CL is just plain easy.

[Vincent Takeda]

DM_Blake wrote:

Vincent Takeda wrote:

And again, crafting an item that grants wishes is a 'spell activation item' like scrolls and potions and wands, where the casting prerequisites cannot be bypassed by the +5dc check, so lets not get all zany about bypassing the spell use and material component costs for wish items again.

They are? Since when?

Ring of Three Wishes. Usable by EVERYONE, not just someone with Wish on their class list. Rings are not intrinsically spell-completion items, and nothing specific in that one that overrides this.

ORly?

Usable by EVERYONE? Even people who can't cast spells at all? Like a potion? Whose construction spell requirement can't be bypassed?

Seems to me like casting a wish from a ring of wishes or a luckblade is in fact 'activating a spell' especially since that spell is then 'drained from the item and never usable again'.... Heck even the tomes and librams that require wishes 'cost' as much as the wishes they require' and 'duplicate the effect of having multiple higher attribute bonus wishes issued at the same time' which is identical to having the casters cast the spell. Even the books are 'activating a spell' which disappears once it's done, never to be used again. Just because its a sword or a ring or a book doesnt mean it isnt behaving like a wand or a staff... or a potion.

I think the reason there's no formal faq yet on 'can you bybass the wish requirement and component cost by taking the +5dc' is because the developers can't imagine anyone foolish enough to try, but now that you're here perhaps its time to flag this puppy for a formal faqqing.

[Vincent Takeda]

I'm totally ready. I'm jazzed. Lets do this! Feel free to join the FAQ request here! Together we can make a difference!

Specifically can I bypass the wish requirement and/or component cost for the wish spells when crafting rings of wishes/luck blades/tomes/manuals?

Further: If I can, then in the situation where at item reqires multiple castings of the same spell (+5 Tome!) can I bypass all of the castings/component costs with a single +5dc or do I need to take a separate +5dc for each instance of the wish?

+5 Tome: CL17, starting DC 22! Cost to create? 131250.
+5 Tome: CL17, bypass all wishes with a single +5dc? DC27! No wishes cast? Cost to create? still need the diamonss! 131250!
+5 Tome: CL17, bypass all wishes with a single +5dc? DC27! Cost to create? No more diamonds needed! 12500! Only takes 13 days to make it or 7 with fast crafting yay!
+5 Tome: CL17. need a +5dc to overcome each wish so DC47! (ooh!) Cost to create still needs the diamonds? 131250?
+5 Tome CL17, need a +5dc to overcome each wish so DC47! No more diamons either? Cost to craft is 12500? 7 days of fast crafting?

Which one's right?

[Forseti]

You never really cast any spells at all while making wondrous items, and the cost to create is always exactly the cost given in the item's description.

[Grimmy]

Pizza Lord wrote:

I've been trying to wrap my head around this for a bit and I have to say that the crafting PC is misreading the intent. Bullfrogg2000 seems to have the idea right, but it might have been a bit hard to read.

Quote:

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.

The way I read it, a creator can have assistance with his item as long as he has the actual creation feat. He can have someone else assist him that meets the other requirements, such as being an elf, having 5 ranks in climb, casting a required spell, etc. (except for creating scrolls, potions, wands, and the like, which the creator must have the spell for.) This is likely to prevent the easy access to rare spells from classes, like PrCs. Now casters can't just pass out scrolls with rare spells (like Slime Hurl) without the one with the spell knowledge actually making the scroll.

For each such requirement that the creator does not possess, the DC increases by 5. That doesn't mean any prerequisites are ignored, they all must still be provided, but for every one not provided by the creator themselves, increases the difficulty.

So in order to create a ring of swimming, the creator must have Forge Ring and 5 ranks in Swim, then make a Spellcraft check at DC 7 (5 + 2 CL). If the creator doesn't have 5 ranks of Swim, he can have assistance from someone who does, but then his Spellcraft DC becomes 12. He does NOT get to handwave the requirements away.

I cannot believe that the intent of the...

I'm not going to claim it's RAI but that works for me.

[Avh]

Vincent Takeda wrote:

I'm totally ready. I'm jazzed. Lets do this! Feel free to join the FAQ request here! Together we can make a difference!

Specifically can I bypass the wish requirement and/or component cost for the wish spells when crafting rings of wishes/luck blades/tomes/manuals?

Further: If I can, then in the situation where at item reqires multiple castings of the same spell (+5 Tome!) can I bypass all of the castings/component costs with a single +5dc or do I need to take a separate +5dc for each instance of the wish?

+5 Tome: CL17, starting DC 22! Cost to create? 131250.
+5 Tome: CL17, bypass all wishes with a single +5dc? DC27! No wishes cast? Cost to create? still need the diamonss! 131250!
+5 Tome: CL17, bypass all wishes with a single +5dc? DC27! Cost to create? No more diamonds needed! 12500! Only takes 13 days to make it or 7 with fast crafting yay!
+5 Tome: CL17. need a +5dc to overcome each wish so DC47! (ooh!) Cost to create still needs the diamonds? 131250?
+5 Tome CL17, need a +5dc to overcome each wish so DC47! No more diamons either? Cost to craft is 12500? 7 days of fast crafting?

Which one's right?

I bolded the right one (at least, IMO).

[Vincent Takeda]

Looks like luckblade has the same cl of 17, but since it can only have 3 wishes....

CL17 so DC 22+3 skips of the wish is 37! Nice!
Somewhere between 34135 and 109135 in expenses...
Doesnt talk about diamonds...
or even rubies like a wishing ring does...

So with say a caster level 5 for crafting arms and armor...
5 ranks
3 from class skill
4 from intelligence
4 from arcane builder
8 from inexplicable luck
3 from skillfocus spellcraft

I could take 10 on these puppies!
Luck blade factory at level 5!?!?
Say it aint so!

[Bullfrogg2000]

Forseti in the description of the wounderous item ring ECG. The spell needs to be prepared for each day of the crafting. Through out the day the spell is triggered automaticly. Causing the created to loose access to the spell for the day.
So I would say that yes the spell is cast in the creation and its cast every day of the creation.

[Bullfrogg2000]

Adding a +5 for everyday that the spell isn't present is actually a fantastic take on the rule.
I personally hunk all of the requirements must be met by the creator or an out side source(including being at the right CL) But where the player insists that nothing is required to creat an item then the above def applies.

[Forseti]

Bullfrogg2000 wrote:

Forseti in the description of the wounderous item ring ECG. The spell needs to be prepared for each day of the crafting. Through out the day the spell is triggered automaticly. Causing the created to loose access to the spell for the day.

So I would say that yes the spell is cast in the creation and its cast every day of the creation.

Spells are prepared and expended each day, but not cast.

PRD on "Creating Rings" wrote:

The act of working on the ring triggers the prepared spells, making them unavailable for casting during each day of the ring's creation. (That is, those spell slots are expended from the caster's currently prepared spells, just as if they had been cast.)

I was commenting on a situation involving Wondrous Items though, but similar text is found in the rules for creating those as well.

[Diego Rossi]

Vincent Takeda wrote:

Looks like luckblade has the same cl of 17, but since it can only have 3 wishes....

CL17 so DC 22+3 skips of the wish is 37! Nice!
Somewhere between 34135 and 109135 in expenses...
Doesnt talk about diamonds...
or even rubies like a wishing ring does...

So with say a caster level 5 for crafting arms and armor...
5 ranks
3 from class skill
4 from intelligence
4 from arcane builder
8 from inexplicable luck
3 from skillfocus spellcraft

I could take 10 on these puppies!
Luck blade factory at level 5!?!?
Say it aint so!

You need way less:

DC 22 (CL 17+5) +5 for lacking wish = final DC 27

3 ranks
3 for class skill = 6
4 for intelligence = 10
2 for masterwork items = 12
5 for Crafter's Fortune = 17
Taking 10 = 27

Done.

Note that you don't need to have 3 wish memorized when making the blade.
The requirement is "If spells are involved in the prerequisites for making the weapon, the creator must have prepared the spells to be cast (or must know the spells, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) and must provide any material components or focuses the spells require. " but the required spells are " wish or miracle;", single, not multiple.
You need to pay the material component for the multiple spells (once) during the item creation, but you need to memorize a single exemplar of each spell needed to make the item.

Going your interpretation it would be impossible to craft a wand, as you would need to memorize the spell in the wand 50 times each day during the wand creation.

Even a 20th level character would have problems doing that for a wand with a fist level spell.

The reference to spells is for items that require different spells, like a staff of healing, that would require you to prepare one each of cure serious wounds, lesser restoration, remove blindness/deafness, remove disease, each day during the staff creation.

- * -

Note that this is always in effect, even for weapons:

Spell has material component cost Add directly into price of item per charge

Wish blade
Construction

Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, wish or miracle; Cost 11,185 gp (0 wishes), 43,835 gp (1 wish), 76,485 gp (2 wishes), 109,135 gp (3 wishes).

The cost of adding a wish is 32.650 gp, two 65.300 and three 97.950 gp.

an that is 25.000 + 7.650(1) multiplied for teh number of wishes in the sword.

(1) 17*9*50= 7.650
Single use, use-activated (uttering a wish) = Spell level × caster level × 50 gp

[Pizza Lord]

Avh wrote:

I think you're confusing 2 things.

Assistance is when someone else provide the requirement (or with exterior sources, like scrolls for example) : it can be done for any items, and do not provoke a +5 DC to the craft check...

Magic Item Creation(MIC) wrote:

The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet.

This means it does increase the DC if the caster doesn't meet the requirement, otherwise it would just say 'for each requirement not meant,' rather than pointing out the requirements not met by the caster ('caster' being used interchangeably with 'creator' and 'crafter' in the magic item creation rules).

Avh wrote:

No requirement is when the crafter does not meet the requirement at all.

If a requirement is not met, by the crafter or through assistance, then the item cannot be made.

MIC wrote:

These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created...The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet.

It does not say that adding +5 to Spellcraft DC replaces or removes the requirement, only that if the caster does not meet the requirement themselves (ie. provides it with a secondary source) the DC increases for each such requirement.

Otherwise, you run into a situation where it is more beneficial for a caster to purposefully not meet the requirement.

Play with the variables. Take them to their logical, abuseable conclusions when you allow the requirements to be ignored. You will see that the mistaken belief that a +5 DC replaces the requirements does not fit as well as the reading I have given you.

There is no way any developer will say that having to make a +5 DC as well as not having to make an effort to supply a requirement makes up for a prepared character having to expend charges from a secondary source, like three scrolls wish or lose access to spell slots for 100+ days (and that's still assuming you have to pay for factored-in costs of spell material components for items that require them. You can bet that some player will try and get out of it by saying since they don't really have to spend the spell slots, maybe not even being high level to have the slots, they don't use the components.)

Trust me, the second they allow this you can be flooded with +5 tomes with the half-price cost being the only limiting factor to a 3rd level crafter with Craft Wondrous Item, along with DC27 Spellcraft check. I think we've already shown the relative ease making that check with a Take 10 can be had. There's scarcely a chance at failure for a character who wants to do this, let alone a chance at a cursed result for making one of the most valuable and sought after items in the game!

Vincent Takeda,
A ring of wishes and a luck blade will require the 25,000 gp material component for each wish it will emulate. A Tome of ... does not require the material component because the item does not emulate the casting of a wish spell, it is merely the spell requirement. (Yes, I understand that a wish or multiples thereof can do what the tome does, but then it is wish. Most of its uses are duplicating something or other. The point is, it's not the same as if the tome granted 1-5 wishes.)

MIC wrote:

In addition, some items cast or replicate spells with costly material components. For these items, the market price equals the base price plus an extra price for the spell component costs...

...Having a spell with a costly component as a prerequisite does not automatically incur this cost.

[ryric]

Crafting is not supposed to be hard.

It is RAI that a low level character can, in theory, create a high level items if given the time and money to do so. Time and money are the limiting factors of magic item creation, not creation DC and spell availability.

Yes a level 3 wizard optimized for creation can crank out a luck blade or a +5 tome...if he has the ridiculous wealth and free time required to do so. If your 3rd level party has 130k gp there are many more game breaking things a crafter can do than making a +5 ability score for 1 person. (If you examine the pricing scheme of the tomes it is clear that the diamond price is in there) He could, for example, make +6 enhancement stat items for his whole group.

The crafting DC system is much more of a challenge for a non-int based spontaneous caster like a sorcerer or oracle. Some people do take crafting feats without focusing their entire character like a laser toward item creation.

[Avh]

Pizza Lord wrote:

This means it does increase the DC if the caster doesn't meet the requirement, otherwise it would just say 'for each requirement not meant,' rather than pointing out the requirements not met by the caster ('caster' being used interchangeably with 'creator' and 'crafter' in the magic item creation rules).

Except that if the creator find someone to meet the requirement, the prerequisite is met, and so the +5 has no sense.

I'm 100% sure that +5 DC is when you don't meet the prerequisite at all.

Quote:

If a requirement is not met, by the crafter or through assistance, then the item cannot be made.

Nope. And that's the great change from 3.5 to Pathfinder. And that's what allows non-caster to craft weapons BTW.

Quote:

MIC wrote:

These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created...The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet.

It does not say that adding +5 to Spellcraft DC replaces or removes the requirement, only that if the caster does not meet the requirement themselves (ie. provides it with a secondary source) the DC increases for each such requirement. Otherwise, you run into a situation where it is more beneficial for a caster to purposefully not meet the requirement.

Nope. It increases for each prerequisite that is not met at all.

Quote:

Play with the variables. Take them to their logical, abuseable conclusions when you allow the requirements to be ignored. You will see that the mistaken belief that a +5 DC replaces the requirements does not fit as well as the reading I have given you.

There is no way any developer will say that having to make a +5 DC as well as not having to make an effort to supply a requirement makes up for a prepared character having to expend charges from a secondary source, like three scrolls wish or lose access to spell slots for 100+ days (and that's still assuming you have to pay for...

It has been said in the FAQ... by a developper. Every prerequisite can be bypassed by a +5.

The only exceptions are :
- The feat, that is mandatory.
- The spell for Potions, scrolls and wands, that must be met, either by the caster or by assistance.

And that's it.

[Pizza Lord]

Avh wrote:

Nope. And that's the great change from 3.5 to Pathfinder. And that's what allows non-caster to craft weapons BTW.

If that were the case, the Craft feats (including Craft Magical Arms and Armor) wouldn't have caster level requirements, now would they? And since the Craft feat will always be required of the crafter, your reason doesn't really hold up.

[Avh]

Pizza Lord wrote:

Avh wrote:

Nope. And that's the great change from 3.5 to Pathfinder. And that's what allows non-caster to craft weapons BTW.

If that were the case, the Craft feats (including Craft Magical Arms and Armor) wouldn't have caster level requirements, now would they? And since the Craft feat will always be required of the crafter, your reason doesn't really hold up.

I have a feat I want to show you :HERE

[Aranna]

Master Craftsman feat allows you to use your ranks in a craft or profession skill as caster level. This is how a fighter can buy craft wondrous item. On top of that they use that same skill to create the new magic item. SO if a fighter with craft(jewelry) and both master craftsman and craft wondrous item feats wanted to he could craft a necklace of fireballs... the +5 DC for not knowing fireball would be added to his craft(jewelry) skill check to create the item.

[Aranna]

Also keep in mind people the GM has both approval VETO and pricing control over all items not already spelled out in the game.

So he could simply say NO to the helm of vaderness without needing to price it out of reach.

[Pizza Lord]

Master Craftsman, see now that's what we're looking for. That's the kind of special feat or ability that twists the usual rules and causes trouble. Modifying how normal feats and skills interact.

But there it is. It also points out spell requirements are still required with the DC increase, but not whether they are now no longer required at all, It doesn't mention non-spell requirements, like 'must be an elf', but that's probably academic.

Sorry, Heimdall666, I tried for you, but they did apparently slip some feat in there, even though it could actually be clearer and state whether the DC increase is for completely ignoring, or for not possessing but still being provided from secondary assistance,

[Diego Rossi]

Pizza Lord wrote:

Play with the variables. Take them to their logical, abuseable conclusions when you allow the requirements to be ignored. You will see that the mistaken belief that a +5 DC replaces the requirements does not fit as well as the reading I have given you.

There is no way any developer will say that having to make a +5 DC as well as not having to make an effort to supply a requirement makes up for a prepared character having to expend charges from a secondary source, like three scrolls wish or lose access to spell slots for 100+ days (and that's still assuming you have to pay for...

FAQ wrote:

Crafting and Bypassing Requirements: What crafting requirements can you bypass by adding +5 to the DC of your Spellcraft check?

As presented on page 549 of the Core Rulebook, there are no limitations other than (1) you have to have the item creation feat, and (2) you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites. So racial requirements, specific spell requirements, math requirements (such as "caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus"), and so on, are all subject to the +5 DC rule.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 02/22/13

You asked?

[Diego Rossi]

And about cooperative crafting:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Oliver McShade and the Core Ruleook wrote:

"It is possible for more than one character to cooperate in the creation of an item, with each participant providing one or more of the prerequisites. In some cases, cooperation may even be necessary."

A wizard and a cleric cooperating to craft a scroll of cure light wounds are, between the two of them, meeting all of the prerequisites for the item's creation. Thus, the "you cannot create this if you don't meet all the prerequisites" rule on page 549 does not apply, [b]because "you" in the case of cooperative crafting is "the people involved in crafting the item."[b]

[Bullfrogg2000]

So just time and cash? Well they craft on the rod though it does take a little longer. And if you lay the hurt on the party they will have plenty of down time. Then really they just need cash.
I know that crafting should be acceptably easy but I don't think that it should be possible that a third lvl player be able to make such powerful items. To take it down a notch even if you regulate the cash flow a crafting player will have twice the access to magic items that every one else has because the crafters only paying half price.
And the though that a warrior would be able to make a magic item as easy as a caster well that's a little far fetched. If they out source the magic and raise the DC that's cool but they have no mojo of their own.
If you go by no requirement s needed and a magic item only really requires a GP value then any plot of dirt would do. Land in game should have value though not much but by that rule you can magically suck up a crater in the land scape and creat you luck blade. And maybe in the process find a few diamonds.

[Bullfrogg2000]

After thinking for a bit I've come,to the conclusion that this is a poorly written section of the book. Both sides are laid out and the best thing would be for the GM to clarify the rule for his world and or for the table to vote on a house rule. Wether every one agrees or not the ruling should be respected and if any one feels the need to go crazy about it its on them. The goal is to have a good time for every one GM included. Some times you have to agree to disagree and go with the person running the game wether they are right or not. It's not easy to be the GM so cut the guy some slack and a little respect and if its not house ruled change it when you run. :-)

[Aranna]

Ok I am a bit lazy and don't want to read through the last two pages trying to figure out what you are confused over Bullfrogg2000. The crafting rules seem perfectly clear to me. Maybe I can help you with some point?

You can't just start with dirt and make a luckblade...
You need the supplies for making a luckblade. Expensive supplies and good amounts of skill.