Help Me Update Artificer for KQ

[Dario Nardi]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

But in PF HD is tied to BAB. So with that BAB he would be a d6 not a D8

Also just what does the craft log do? And for me the craft dc should be 5 per every spell your missing. And just where does the spell crom from with Imbue Item:?

Another thing for me I dislike them becomeing a magic item...and it really does not explain or fit with the rest of the theme to me

For HD and BAB

d6 = poor BAB progression
d8 = average BAB progression
d10 = best BAB progression
I'm not sure what you're seeing. The class has d8 and average BAB. I have the Pathfinder cleric and monk right in front of me as examples to confirm.

EDIT: OK, I see I didn't spell out the whole progression and a cursory look might suggest poor BAB progression, but the +0/+1/+2/+3/+3 is meant to indicate average BAB progression.

The craft log is a record of spells the artificer is familiar with. The craft log is where the spells come from for imbue item. Remember, the artificer doesn't cast spells, he makes magic items, and the craft rules now allow characters to create magic items without providing the required spell. Imbue item is just making a single shot magic item, very quickly.

Thanks for catching the craft DC issue. It isn't clear as written that the DC goes go up by 5 for each missing spell. I'll fix that.

The artificer becoming a magic item goes back to 1st edition AD&D. There is an April issue Dragon magazine article about wizards becoming magic items. (Maybe VIC will know it?!) Since artificers are so into magic items and constructs and such, it seems like a natural evolution. Receptacle of magic is the important feature, since it frees the artificer from relying solely on external devices--he is his own magic item. The rest, I admit, is a matter of taste and some people may not like it. It's at 20th level, though, so it's not like it'll make much difference.

[seekerofshadowlight]

Dario Nardi wrote:

For HD and BAB
d6 = poor BAB progression
d8 = average BAB progression
d10 = best BAB progression
I'm not sure what you're seeing. The class has d8 and average BAB. I have the Pathfinder cleric and monk right in front of me as examples to confirm.

The craft log is a record of spells the artificer is familiar with. The craft log is where the spells come from for imbue item. Remember, the artificer doesn't cast spells, he makes magic items, and the craft rules now allow characters to create magic items without providing the required spell. Imbue item is just making a single shot magic item, very quickly.

Thanks for catching the craft DC issue. It isn't clear as written that the DC goes go up by 5 for each missing spell. I'll fix that.

The artificer becoming a magic item goes back to 1st edition AD&D. There is an April issue Dragon magazine article about wizards becoming magic items. (Maybe VIC will know it?!) Since artificers are so into magic items and constructs and such, it seems like a natural evolution. Receptacle of magic is the important feature, since it frees the artificer from relying solely on external devices--he is his own magic item. The rest, I admit, is a matter of taste and some people may not like it. It's at 20th level, though, so it's not like it'll make much difference.

Thanks man a few things. The doc you linked shows Poor BAB.

I guess thats what the log was, however it is not clear in the log part. I would write it close to how you just explained it as it needs to be clear under the log entry. Maybe change the name to spellcraftsmen lore or something. But it needs to be more clear.

Cool on the craft dC you need to cover feats emulating as well as race stuff as some items need race to craft.

On the magic item thing. I just don't see it, it comes out of left field. You have no build up to it...it's BAM your a magic item now. But how, why, when and just what are you?

It really seems just tacked on and has little to do with the class.I know your looking for a cap stone but it feels out of wack with the rest of the class.

Magic item thing sounds like a PRC or something you work toward. The class gives zero hints of this at all. It needs a capstone that fits within the theme of creations, and such

edit: It is now showing up as medium BAB...I would also drop the art trick at 10th, he gets advanced he should not gain both at that level.

And how does he gain more spells in his log?

[Takamonk]

Dario Nardi wrote:

Here is version 3 of the Pf artificer

As for Hit Dice, I've been using d8 Hit Die and average BAB progression.

I agree with pruning the ones in blue.

However, I would consider rolling Duel (Dual?) Wands into Repeat Activation, and simply call it Dual Activation. You can activate two different magic items or the same magic item twice as a full-round action. Two wands, a wand and a staff, a wand and a ring, the same staff. Although, leaving it as written might make staves that much more useful. Also, please specify, do you yourself count as a magical item for purposes of this ability?

After additional thought about soulbinding: You should likely include text that states something to the effect that while the soul retains memories of its former life, DM determines what class abilities and feats, if any, the soul retains.

I don't like my ring silently casting dimension door on me over the edge into the volcano. 8-(

Likewise, this could also balance out the whole awakened construct issue. DM can use discretion as to how powerful the construct is, should you choose to find space to include it.

[Dario Nardi]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

Thanks man a few things. The doc you linked shows Poor BAB.

I guess thats what the log was, however it is not clear in the log part. I would write it close to how you just explained it as it needs to be clear under the log entry. Maybe change the name to spellcraftsmen lore or something. But it needs to be more clear.

Cool on the craft dC you need to cover feats emulating as well as race stuff as some items need race to craft.

On the magic item thing. I just don't see it, it comes out of left field. You have no build up to it...it's BAM your a magic item now. But how, why, when and just what are you?

It really seems just tacked on and has little to do with the...

The earlier link didn't spell out the 3rd column of iterative attacks (i.e. +15/+10/+5). I just had +15/+10. It was average BAB but missing that third iterative attack. Just slipped my mind. Anyway...

Yeah, I can clarify the log. I'm coming from a science / lab background where the term "log" means a list of things you've encountered or done. Obviously not everyone's experience. Spellcrafter Lore is certainly more flavorful.

The magic item transformation starts at 16th level with the Receptacle of Magic feature, which reads:
At 16th level, an artificer shows signs of eldritch transformation. He may enchant and activate his own body as if it were a staff.

So the final transformation at 20th level isn't meant to be a surprise, but a culmination. My design philosophy is more old-school like how the druid used to become a hierophant, and then in 3rd edition hierophant was moved out of druid and into a prestige class. So yeah, I could have something completely different related more obvious to crafting but I'd like to hear more from folks before changing it.

At 10th level, the Advanced Tricks feature doesn't give a trick, it just allows access to advanced tricks. It's a little odd in presentation but it's how the Pathfinder rogue is done. The Pf rogue has an "advanced talents" feature that actually doesn't give the rogue any talents, just access. So I'm following this new convention.

[Dario Nardi]

Takamonk wrote:

Dario Nardi wrote:

Here is version 3 of the Pf artificer

As for Hit Dice, I've been using d8 Hit Die and average BAB progression.

I agree with pruning the ones in blue.

However, I would consider rolling Duel (Dual?) Wands into Repeat Activation, and simply call it Dual Activation. You can activate two different magic items or the same magic item twice as a full-round action. Two wands, a wand and a staff, a wand and a ring, the same staff. Although, leaving it as written might make staves that much more useful. Also, please specify, do you yourself count as a magical item for purposes of this ability?

After additional thought about soulbinding: You should likely include text that states something to the effect that while the soul retains memories of its former life, DM determines what class abilities and feats, if any, the soul retains.

I don't like my ring silently casting dimension door on me over the edge into the volcano. 8-(

Likewise, this could also balance out the whole awakened construct issue. DM can use discretion as to how powerful the construct is, should you choose to find space to include it.

The computer just ate my response. Trying again...

The volcano image is pretty funny. Good idea about soul binding.

The "duel wand" trick was a pun on engaging in dueling, but when combined with repeat activation, dual activation makes more sense.

Dual Activation: As a full-round action, the artificer can activate two magic items of the same type (two wands, etc) or the same magic item twice. When activating two items, both must be readied. Requires 10 ranks in Use Magic Device and is usable a number of times daily equal to the artificer's Charisma modifier (minimum 1).

[seekerofshadowlight]

cool man. Just seemed tacked on to me, but your call.

[Dario Nardi]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

cool man. Just seemed tacked on to me, but your call.

Honestly, even though I like it, your reaction may well be most people's reaction. And the class isn't just for me. :-)

[seekerofshadowlight]

Dario Nardi wrote:

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

cool man. Just seemed tacked on to me, but your call.

Honestly, even though I like it, your reaction may well be most people's reaction. And the class isn't just for me. :-)

well the thing for me is it seems tacked on, although you give a hint at 16, becoming a thing of magic is a goal, it should not be a side effect. It seems more like a 5 level PRC to me you take about 15th level.

As I said it is your baby I am just giving feed back, but it seems he should gain powers and ability that allow him to do his class job more, or better and fit within the theme of making and creation, not become something.

Sure it's 2 ability but it comes off as out of left field and really just throws the whole thing off for me.

other then that I do like what you are doing really

[Dario Nardi]

If the artificer's focus is making and using magic items, then the capstone ability involves... channeling everything one has learned to make the penultimate unique magic item!

Hmm... a high end magic item like a +10 sword found at 20th level is worth 200,000 gp.

Penultimate Creation: Any one time after reaching 20th level, an artificer can sequester himself for one month in his lab. During this time, he draws upon his feats, skills and tricks to design and construct a single magic item of staggering genius (savage beauty, eldritch horror, or clockwork wonder). The item is worth up to 200,000 gp, though he need only spend 20,000 gp. If interrupted for more than three days, he must start over. Once the item is crafted, the act can never be repeated.

[seekerofshadowlight]

that's more to my liking. A crowing achievement type item I like that ideal however. His legacy his one true work of art. Yeah I like that much better. May have to work on mechanics a little.But yeah I like it

what would you do at 16th however?

[dm4hire]

I've never been a fan of the one shot uber item creation thing since there are many fantasy references to multiple creations by crafters. I understand where you're coming from since in the Icewind Dale series Bruenor had crafted many items, but when he created the hammer for Wulfgar he knew it was his last. If memory serves correctly he does later on make another item, but it pales to the hammer.

I think a better solution would be to give an increasing percentage chance of losing the ability to create uber (artifact) items and once lost they no longer can do it since that's what they are ultimately out to do, create an artifact or two. Perhaps have each special powers on chart assigned a modifier that when added increases the chance that it will be the last artifact they make. This way they could make a few minor artifacts or go for the gusto and create one world shattering artifact.

You could have the base percentage like 15% plus an additional 10% per previous artifact in addition to the modifiers from the special powers chart. I’d set each modifier to at least 5%. That would mean that only creating artifacts with one artifact type power, if successful, would have a continuous increase of 10% every try. First attempt with one power would be 20%, second would be 30%, and third would be 40%, and so on.

It could just as easily be handled by increasing the DC with penalties, but I’ve always been a fan of rolling percentages.

[GeraintElberion]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

Another thing for me I dislike them becomeing a magic item...and it really does not explain or fit with the rest of the theme to me

I am old, my body grows weak but still there is much to do.

My guild grows strong and wealthy but my apprentices lack the discipline needed to match my achievements.

I will craft my final, greatest item (goggles of artifice, rod of the guild, whatever...) and leave instructions that the head of the guild shall carry it at all times. I'll make sure it can fly too.

Then i'll put myself in the adamantine vessel - eternal life!

(the item then spends two thousand years at the bottom of a cave-in)

"So you want us to go on a quest to stop this crazy miner who never takes his goggles off/lets go of his wand/whatever and has forced a tribe of lizard men to recreate an ancient laboratory deep in the jungle?"

It's not a player ability, it's an awesome adventure seed.

I like it.

[Wolfthulhu]

I kind of liked the becoming a magic item bit. It was a little off the wall, but I thought it was interesting.

Concerning your possible replacment, shouldn't it be Ultimate Creation? Because penultimate means something more like 'nearly ultimate' or 'almost ultimate'.

[Majuba]

Darkwolf wrote:

I kind of liked the becoming a magic item bit. It was a little off the wall, but I thought it was interesting.

Concerning your possible replacment, shouldn't it be Ultimate Creation? Because penultimate means something more like 'nearly ultimate' or 'almost ultimate'.

Next to last (or second to last). HUGE silly debate here when they put that on a Dragon Magazine as it was ending. :)

I like the ability as well, haven't had time to read the new writeup (or one before that).

[Wolfthulhu]

Majuba wrote:

Next to last (or second to last). HUGE silly debate here when they put that on a Dragon Magazine as it was ending. :)

I like the ability as well, haven't had time to read the new writeup (or one before that).

It's only a 'silly' debate if you don't mind poor language usage. ;-) I blame the common incorrect usage on poor sit-com writers who made it popular.

Spoiler:

I'm gonna have to find that thread, just for my amusement

[Matthew Morris]

Dario Nardi wrote:

To make it more complicated, I wasn't born Dario either. But everyone called me that since I was a fetus, and when I was 3 the whole family agreed to make Dario official. (Like Nardi, Dario is Italian, but I got a job interview once because someone thought I was Hispanic.) A free book for anyone who knows my birth name!

Giovanni Nardi? :-)

Now I've something to play with when I get home and away from firewalls.

[Dario Nardi]

dm4hire,
I love your idea of allowing the possibility of a second (or perhaps third) use of the ability, but only with a decreasing chance -- sort of like the death and dying rules -- and less benefit in any case. It would also then fit the word Penultimate because the creation might not be the last.

GeraintElberion,
By keeping the soul binding trick, the artificer can bind himself into his own penultimate item and live forever as a magic item (the bottom of a cave-in, love it!)

Darkwolf and Majuba,
I never really thought about the term penultimate. I sort of assumed it meant 5x ultimate or something like that (from the prefix penta). Oops. That said, the item is NOT an artifact / relic and therefore can only ever be 2nd best. Ha! So perhaps the term is appropriate.

As for the 16th level ability... I'm thinking of something like this.

Spell Expertise: Upon attaining 16th level, an artificer selects 7 levels worth of spells from his spellcraft log and can use each spell once daily as a spell-like ability.

That said, I still like the idea of the artificer treating himself as a magic item....

Thoughts?

[Dario Nardi]

Matthew Morris wrote:

Dario Nardi wrote:

To make it more complicated, I wasn't born Dario either. But everyone called me that since I was a fetus, and when I was 3 the whole family agreed to make Dario official. (Like Nardi, Dario is Italian, but I got a job interview once because someone thought I was Hispanic.) A free book for anyone who knows my birth name!

Giovanni Nardi? :-)

Now I've something to play with when I get home and away from firewalls.

Giovanni, ha!

Here's a hint. I'm half English. The English side arrived to America in the colonial period and ultimately traces its lineage to France. What very famous man "arrived" to England from what is today modern France during the mid-1000s? The family tree on this side is well-kept and this ancestor is not apocryphal; he is well-recorded.

By the way, the name Dario is linked to Emperor Darius of Peria but it comes from Zoroastrianism. Anyone know what it means in this ancient religion?

[Dario Nardi]

Okay, here is a more-or-less ALMOST FINAL VERSION. I have about 24 hours before it gets into Wolfgang's hands.

Some rule inconsistencies are fixed, some abilities moved around slightly (to keep with the odd/even level format), and so forth. I moved up mass infusion to 16th level. If you catch a typo, please let me know.

[Paul Watson]

Dario Nardi wrote:

Okay, here is a more-or-less ALMOST FINAL VERSION. I have about 24 hours before it gets into Wolfgang's hands.

Some rule inconsistencies are fixed, some abilities moved around slightly (to keep with the odd/even level format), and so forth. I moved up mass infusion to 16th level. If you catch a typo, please let me know.

Fixed the link for you

[Xuttah]

Dario Nardi wrote:

Okay, here is a more-or-less ALMOST FINAL VERSION. I have about 24 hours before it gets into Wolfgang's hands.

Some rule inconsistencies are fixed, some abilities moved around slightly (to keep with the odd/even level format), and so forth. I moved up mass infusion to 16th level. If you catch a typo, please let me know.

Interesting version on the artificer. Can they take Eschew Material Components as a feat?

[Dario Nardi]

Paul Watson wrote:

Dario Nardi wrote:

Okay, here is a more-or-less ALMOST FINAL VERSION. I have about 24 hours before it gets into Wolfgang's hands.

Some rule inconsistencies are fixed, some abilities moved around slightly (to keep with the odd/even level format), and so forth. I moved up mass infusion to 16th level. If you catch a typo, please let me know.

Fixed the link for you

D'oh! Thanks!

Anyone trying the link now should find it working.

[Dario Nardi]

Xuttah wrote:

Dario Nardi wrote:

Okay, here is a more-or-less ALMOST FINAL VERSION. I have about 24 hours before it gets into Wolfgang's hands.

Some rule inconsistencies are fixed, some abilities moved around slightly (to keep with the odd/even level format), and so forth. I moved up mass infusion to 16th level. If you catch a typo, please let me know.

Interesting version on the artificer. Can they take Eschew Material Components as a feat?

It would be useful when using Imbue Item ability, but yeah. As written now, the feat has no prerequisites, which means even a 1st level barbarian could take it! :-)

[Adam Daigle]

Darkwolf wrote:

Majuba wrote:

Next to last (or second to last). HUGE silly debate here when they put that on a Dragon Magazine as it was ending. :)

I like the ability as well, haven't had time to read the new writeup (or one before that).

It's only a 'silly' debate if you don't mind poor language usage. ;-) I blame the common incorrect usage on poor sit-com writers who made it popular.

** spoiler omitted **

I tried finding it, but my search-fu failed. It was truly a great thread, chock full of balls and bowls...and pedantic ramblings. It was the kinda thing we argued about before edition wars were in fashion.

[Xuttah]

Dario Nardi wrote:

... which means even a 1st level barbarian could take it! :-)

Which is a huge relief for me. You have no idea how many times my barbarian has found himself unable to cast spells for want of material components...or the proper class selection...or requisite ability scores...:)

[Dario Nardi]

Xuttah wrote:

Dario Nardi wrote:

... which means even a 1st level barbarian could take it! :-)

Which is a huge relief for me. You have no idea how many times my barbarian has found himself unable to cast spells for want of material components...or the proper class selection...or requisite ability scores...:)

Oh Gods, thank you for the wonderful guffaw (I just looked up the word to make sure I understood its penultimate definition).

Here's an illustrative if somewhat boring sample character.

Luxorin
CN male human artificer 1

Str 13, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 16, Wis 10, Cha 14

Move 30'
Initiative +2
Hit Points: 12
AC 15 (touch 12, flatfooted 13)
BAB +0

[b]Class Abilities: Imbue Item (2x/day, 10 minutes), item creation, artificer bonus (after 1 minute enjoy +1 bonus on Use Magic Device check or Craft (alchemy) check), Thrifty artisan (-25% cost to make items).

Class Skills: Appraise +7, Craft (alchemy) +7, Craft (weapons) +7, Knowledge (arcana) +7, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +7, Knowledge (engineering) +7, Perception +4, Slight of Hand +6, Spellcraft +9, Use Magic Device +8.

Feats: Scribe Scroll, Magical Aptitude, Toughness

Spellcraft Log: burning hands, cure light wounds, detect magic, identify, light

Equipment: studded leather armor, dagger, spear, gem (worth 100 gp), artisan's tools, 6 gp in coins

Background: Luxorin has been making ends meet by scribing cure light wounds scrolls. He got his name from the brief burst of light associated with reading the scroll for his customers. Curing folks without a deity has gotten him into some trouble with local priests, but he's a tough resourceful guy, skilled at hidding his trade tools (namely, his precious gem "Ruby" whom he talks to and pets furtively.

[GeraintElberion]

Dario Nardi wrote:

A free book for anyone who knows my birth name!

Dario Nardi wrote:

Here's a hint. I'm half English. The English side arrived to America in the colonial period and ultimately traces its lineage to France. What very famous man "arrived" to England from what is today modern France during the mid-1000s? The family tree on this side is well-kept and this ancestor is not apocryphal; he is well-recorded.

By the way, the name Dario is linked to Emperor Darius of Peria but it comes from Zoroastrianism. Anyone know what it means in this ancient religion?

William, as in William The Conqueror?

I studied Darius, amongst many others, at university but have no idea about the name.

Wikipedia says the meaning applied to Darius the Great was 'holding firm the good'.

[Vic Wertz]

Dario Nardi wrote:

There is an April issue Dragon magazine article about wizards becoming magic items. (Maybe VIC will know it?!)

Sorry... can't help there.

[Vic Wertz]

Daigle wrote:

Darkwolf wrote:

Majuba wrote:

Next to last (or second to last). HUGE silly debate here when they put that on a Dragon Magazine as it was ending. :)

I like the ability as well, haven't had time to read the new writeup (or one before that).

It's only a 'silly' debate if you don't mind poor language usage. ;-) I blame the common incorrect usage on poor sit-com writers who made it popular.

** spoiler omitted **

I tried finding it, but my search-fu failed. It was truly a great thread, chock full of balls and bowls...and pedantic ramblings. It was the kinda thing we argued about before edition wars were in fashion.

...but *that* I can help with.

Warning: this thread occasionally gets pushed through funny filters sometimes... and today is one of those days...

[Adam Daigle]

Thanks Vic!

Edit: Ahhh, the filters. How I miss them so.

[Kevin Mack]

Are all those jumbled up words the result of the filters or were they actually posted like that?

[Adam Daigle]

Kevin Mack wrote:

Are all those jumbled up words the result of the filters or were they actually posted like that?

It's due to the filters. There's a few flavors mixed in such as Elmer Fudd, Sm*rf, Pirate, whatever the hell doth and thou would be called, 1337, angry guy and a few others.

[Vic Wertz]

Daigle wrote:

Kevin Mack wrote:

Are all those jumbled up words the result of the filters or were they actually posted like that?

It's due to the filters. There's a few flavors mixed in such as Elmer Fudd, Sm*rf, Pirate, whatever the hell doth and thou would be called, 1337, angry guy and a few others.

It'll be more readable—but slightly less funny—tomorrow.

[Dario Nardi]

Vic Wertz wrote:

Dario Nardi wrote:

There is an April issue Dragon magazine article about wizards becoming magic items. (Maybe VIC will know it?!)

Sorry... can't help there.

Likely April of 1985 or 1986. I used to have that issue, and most of the issues from 56 through about 140 or so, but I sold them to a hobby shop when I left New York.

[Matthew Morris]

Dario Nardi wrote:

Vic Wertz wrote:

Dario Nardi wrote:

There is an April issue Dragon magazine article about wizards becoming magic items. (Maybe VIC will know it?!)

Sorry... can't help there.

Likely April of 1985 or 1986. I used to have that issue, and most of the issues from 56 through about 140 or so, but I sold them to a hobby shop when I left New York.

Hmm looked through the april issues on the CD compilation. no joy. I'll look tomorrow afternoon.

[Wolfthulhu]

Vic Wertz wrote:

Daigle wrote:

Kevin Mack wrote:

Are all those jumbled up words the result of the filters or were they actually posted like that?

It's due to the filters. There's a few flavors mixed in such as Elmer Fudd, Sm*rf, Pirate, whatever the hell doth and thou would be called, 1337, angry guy and a few others.

It'll be more readable—but slightly less funny—tomorrow.

Funny? That gives me a headache. :) Of course the unfiltered version will likely do the same.

[Dario Nardi]

GeraintElberion wrote:

Dario Nardi wrote:

A free book for anyone who knows my birth name!

Dario Nardi wrote:

Here's a hint. I'm half English. The English side arrived to America in the colonial period and ultimately traces its lineage to France. What very famous man "arrived" to England from what is today modern France during the mid-1000s? The family tree on this side is well-kept and this ancestor is not apocryphal; he is well-recorded.

By the way, the name Dario is linked to Emperor Darius of Peria but it comes from Zoroastrianism. Anyone know what it means in this ancient religion?

William, as in William The Conqueror?

I studied Darius, amongst many others, at university but have no idea about the name.

Wikipedia says the meaning applied to Darius the Great was 'holding firm the good'.

The funny things is, my dad, grandfathers on both sides of the family, and others were also named William.

If my dad's dad was Bill, and
my mom's dad was William, and
my dad was Billy, then
I was going to be called Willy.

Oh the logic, it's inescapable, isn't it!
Wait, Little Billy was an alternative, which I suppose was better than Little Willy. (eye roll here)

[Wolfthulhu]

Dario Nardi wrote:

The funny things is, my dad, grandfathers on both sides of the family, and others were also named William.

If my dad's dad was Bill, and
my mom's dad was William, and
my dad was Billy, then
I was going to be called Willy.

Oh the logic, it's inescapable, isn't it!
Wait, Little Billy was an alternative, which I suppose was better than Little Willy. (eye roll here)

Not bad. My name is Robert, I go by Rob. Both my mother and my father have brothers named Robert; Uncle Bob and, yes, Uncle Bob. My parents divorced and Mom remarried. One of my new step-brothers was named Robert, who luckily went by Bobby.

And to stir things up just a bit more, I was originally going to be named Michael, my mom agreed to the last minute change on the condition that I be called Rob, Robby or Robert. She was adamant that I not be another Bob/Bobby. (I never thought to ask her why... I'll have to do that.) A condition to which my father never complied.

[Takamonk]

One thing I don't understand fully is why there's a limitation on the amount the artificer can absorb using Extract Essence. If a DM gives the players the uber-sword of unwieldiness, they'll simply sell it for half, and then put their artificer to work making whatever it is they'd like. If, for flavor, I suppose that's fine, but I'd personally house-rule it out.

Likewise, if the party found a rather nice weapon or item with a drawback, the artificer could repurpose just the drawback.

Also, I'm somewhat unclear on spell-like abilities and how to calculate DCs. Intelligent items get saves, and so do non-intelligent items on PCs. (In the event someone really doesn't want a buff on their equipment, for whatever reason.) Is it Int based or Cha based?

Imbue Item. This one's a little confusing, as well. It emulates spellcasting, but essentially allows you access to many, many castings of high, high level spells once you have access to them. More concern is added when you can imbue them into two magic devices of the same type, and then use the two magic devices simultaneously.

But probably not as scary as some of the other combinations people dream up.

Steal spell. This one also confuses me. If your sorcerer buddy voluntarily gives up his fireball, and he can cast it 8 times per day, does that mean you get your 8 fireballs, and he gets his 8 lightning bolts? I suppose it's only fair, if other creatures get abilities virtually limitlessly.

[Dario Nardi]

Takamonk wrote:

One thing I don't understand fully is why there's a limitation on the amount the artificer can absorb using Extract Essence. If a DM gives the players the uber-sword of unwieldiness, they'll simply sell it for half, and then put their artificer to work making whatever it is they'd like. If, for flavor, I suppose that's fine, but I'd personally house-rule it out.

Likewise, if the party found a rather nice weapon or item with a drawback, the artificer could repurpose just the drawback.

Also, I'm somewhat unclear on spell-like abilities and how to calculate DCs. Intelligent items get saves, and so do non-intelligent items on PCs. (In the event someone really doesn't want a buff on their equipment, for whatever reason.) Is it Int based or Cha based?

Imbue Item. This one's a little confusing, as well. It emulates spellcasting, but essentially allows you access to many, many castings of high, high level spells once you have access to them. More concern is added when you can imbue them into two magic devices of the same type, and then use the two magic devices simultaneously.

But probably not as scary as some of the other combinations people dream up.

Steal spell. This one also confuses me. If your sorcerer buddy voluntarily gives up his fireball, and he can cast it 8 times per day, does that mean you get your 8 fireballs, and he gets his 8 lightning bolts? I suppose it's only fair, if other creatures get abilities virtually limitlessly.

Good questions. Happily, I cleaned up most of these issues before the article went off.

Extract Essence has limits because I'm painfully familiar with munchkins and power-gamers. A PC could take a few levels of this class and then uses its abilities as a springboard to "get broken" with his main class.

With the new Pathfinder magic item craft rules, the artificer will be making a small but notable number of half-working and cursed items (not by choice), so I felt extract essence needed to balance out that issue.

The rule text under the artificer tricks says to calculate SLA DC's using Intelligence. For items the artificer makes, those DCs are set automatically independent of his level and stats. For the imbue item ability, I added a line clarifying that the spells are Intelligence-based.

Imbue item might be challenging for a DM but I don't think so. The original artificer finished his career with 4 spells per level of 1st through 6th level--24+ spells total. And while many of the spells were utility, some were quite useful. In contrast, this artificer at 20th level is limited 10 imbue items per day, and that assumes he takes the prolific imbuement trick. Yes, he's more flexible in spell options than any other spellcaster, but he has to prepare for situations and 10 averages to 2.5 uses per encounter, and those uses must be divided between himself and his allies. How it plays for real, harder to say. But I feel pretty good about it. I hope my thinking here isn't too obscure.

For spell stealing, that's a good question. You treat the targeted character as if he used up the spell for himself, and the character loses access to that spell. So if your sorcerer buddy has 8 slots and knows fireball and lightening bolt, you get 1 use of fireball and he loses knowledge of fireball and has 7 slots remaining. He can't suddenly fill that slot with something else. That slot is gone for the day. I didn't put this in the article, but if the article is accepted, I'm sure I'll have a chance to add a line to clarify this point.

[taig]

I liked the end result! Good luck with your article, Dario/William/Bill/Billy/Willy. :)

[dm4hire]

One small point in the write up I have. Trick sounds wrong and I understand not calling it infusion as that's what WotC uses if I recall correctly. What about calling it Artificer Formulae or something along that line?

[Matthew Morris]

dm4hire wrote:

One small point in the write up I have. Trick sounds wrong and I understand not calling it infusion as that's what WotC uses if I recall correctly. What about calling it Artificer Formulae or something along that line?

Knack?

[Herald]

dm4hire wrote:

One small point in the write up I have. Trick sounds wrong and I understand not calling it infusion as that's what WotC uses if I recall correctly. What about calling it Artificer Formulae or something along that line?

I like formulae, or even formula.

[Dario Nardi]

I like both knack and formula as alternatives. The term trick was sort of a placeholder and I never revisited the issue. If Wolfgang accepts the article then I can probably change the term.

[Takamonk]

Trick, knack, formula(e), talent, aptitude, competency, ...?

Any other suggestions?

[Dario Nardi]

I searched a thesaurus. Under knack, one option was, ta da...
proclivities.
HA!

[toyrobots]

I prefer Formula.

Or, if you want it to match the same part of speech as Infusion, "Formulation".

[Dario Nardi]

toyrobots wrote:

I prefer Formula.

Or, if you want it to match the same part of speech as Infusion, "Formulation".

I really like "basic formulations" and "advanced formulations".

Great contribution, thank you!