Sorcerer creating magic items


Rules Questions

Dark Archive

Hello all,

Another new guy question :)

I don't quite understand the process of creating items that require spells that you don't know.

Say, for example, that I wanted to create a Ring of Protection +1. This requires the spell "shield of faith". Since this is a divine spell, my sorcerer will not know it.

Would a Scroll of Shield of Faith (cast with the appropriate UMD check) work as a substitute?


The scroll (or a wand, staff, etc.) would work, but you'd expend one for every day spent enchanting. A better trick would be find a first level cleric and pay him to assist you (or if you're evil, just charm him into doing it).

Multiple characters can work together to create an item. The feat, spell(s), gold, (and XP pre-Pathfinder) can all be provided by different characters.


The item creation rules say that the only requisite that is mandatory for magic item creation is the item creation feat.

For each requisite you lack, the DC to make the magic item increases by 5.

It seems to me, unless I'm misunderstanding, that your sorcerer can make the ring of protection despite not being able to cast the shield of faith spell, by accepting that +5 increase to the DC.

Side note:

Of course, the jury is apparently still out on how to determine the DC. I've seen other posts about the base DC and I've yet to see an official ruling on it.

It's either 5+CL or 10+CL.


kwiqsilver wrote:

The scroll (or a wand, staff, etc.) would work, but you'd expend one for every day spent enchanting. A better trick would be find a first level cleric and pay him to assist you (or if you're evil, just charm him into doing it).

Multiple characters can work together to create an item. The feat, spell(s), gold, (and XP pre-Pathfinder) can all be provided by different characters.

Cast something from the Planar Binding chain of spells. The Sorcerer is the only class who has CHA as a prime req -and- has access to these spells. Summon up a being who can cast the appropriate spell, use your high CHA to get a beneficial deal, and you're done. In fact, with this trick and your UMD skill, you should be quite capable of surpassing the wizard in the area of magic item creation and use.

In theory, you could even have such a being provide the appropriate spell, the appropriate feats, the appropriate exp, etc., BUT the GM is likely to say 'no'. He's likely to be far more willing to let you get access to the appropriate spells this way. Make it a point to ensure your GM has fun roleplaying a demon negotiating with you. If he has fun doing it, he's going to be more open to you doing it the next time.


Molly Dingle wrote:

The item creation rules say that the only requisite that is mandatory for magic item creation is the item creation feat.

For each requisite you lack, the DC to make the magic item increases by 5.

It seems to me, unless I'm misunderstanding, that your sorcerer can make the ring of protection despite not being able to cast the shield of faith spell, by accepting that +5 increase to the DC.

Side note:

Of course, the jury is apparently still out on how to determine the DC. I've seen other posts about the base DC and I've yet to see an official ruling on it.

It's either 5+CL or 10+CL.

5+CL is the base difficulty. For every prereq not met the DC increases by 5.

Straight from the book and PRD:

Quote:

The DC to create a magic item is 5 + the caster level for the item.

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


LilithsThrall wrote:
kwiqsilver wrote:

The scroll (or a wand, staff, etc.) would work, but you'd expend one for every day spent enchanting. A better trick would be find a first level cleric and pay him to assist you (or if you're evil, just charm him into doing it).

Multiple characters can work together to create an item. The feat, spell(s), gold, (and XP pre-Pathfinder) can all be provided by different characters.

Cast something from the Planar Binding chain of spells. The Sorcerer is the only class who has CHA as a prime req -and- has access to these spells. Summon up a being who can cast the appropriate spell, use your high CHA to get a beneficial deal, and you're done. In fact, with this trick and your UMD skill, you should be quite capable of surpassing the wizard in the area of magic item creation and use.

In theory, you could even have such a being provide the appropriate spell, the appropriate feats, the appropriate exp, etc., BUT the GM is likely to say 'no'. He's likely to be far more willing to let you get access to the appropriate spells this way. Make it a point to ensure your GM has fun roleplaying a demon negotiating with you. If he has fun doing it, he's going to be more open to you doing it the next time.

Demons dont normally cast spells. They have spell-like abilities. If they can cast spells they are probably advanced versions with class levels, and you as a player should stay far away from them


concerro wrote:

5+CL is the base difficulty. For every prereq not met the DC increases by 5.

Straight from the book and PRD:

Quote:

The DC to create a magic item is 5 + the caster level for the item.

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

Alas, it's not that clear cut, though base-5 seems to be the consensus. The Feats section of the book and PRD, under Item Creation Feats states the DC starts with a base of 10.


ZappoHisbane wrote:
concerro wrote:

5+CL is the base difficulty. For every prereq not met the DC increases by 5.

Straight from the book and PRD:

Quote:

The DC to create a magic item is 5 + the caster level for the item.

The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet.
Alas, it's not that clear cut, though base-5 seems to be the consensus. The Feats section of the book and PRD, under Item Creation Feats states the DC starts with a base of 10.

I never read general feat sections so I did not notice it, and the 10 would make more sense. I always thought that plus 5 was to easy. That specifically deserves its own thread, and even though you have seen it I had not. I guess I will create one if the developers don't chime in on this thread.


5+CL means that a crafter has a little wiggle room for, say, 1-2 'unknowns' and still take 10.

I suppose it depends on whether you think that's fair or not.


wraithstrike wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
kwiqsilver wrote:

The scroll (or a wand, staff, etc.) would work, but you'd expend one for every day spent enchanting. A better trick would be find a first level cleric and pay him to assist you (or if you're evil, just charm him into doing it).

Multiple characters can work together to create an item. The feat, spell(s), gold, (and XP pre-Pathfinder) can all be provided by different characters.

Cast something from the Planar Binding chain of spells. The Sorcerer is the only class who has CHA as a prime req -and- has access to these spells. Summon up a being who can cast the appropriate spell, use your high CHA to get a beneficial deal, and you're done. In fact, with this trick and your UMD skill, you should be quite capable of surpassing the wizard in the area of magic item creation and use.

In theory, you could even have such a being provide the appropriate spell, the appropriate feats, the appropriate exp, etc., BUT the GM is likely to say 'no'. He's likely to be far more willing to let you get access to the appropriate spells this way. Make it a point to ensure your GM has fun roleplaying a demon negotiating with you. If he has fun doing it, he's going to be more open to you doing it the next time.

Demons dont normally cast spells. They have spell-like abilities. If they can cast spells they are probably advanced versions with class levels, and you as a player should stay far away from them

That's getting pedantic. The point is that there are creatures which can be summoned by planar binding spells which do cast spells.

Quibbling over whether those creatures are, technically, demons ignores the greater point that these things are often sentient, alien, and offer plenty of potential fun to roleplay negotiating with.
Dangerous? Possibly. But, then, who wants to roleplay a coward? And what kind of GM wants to encourage their players to roleplay cowards?


LilithsThrall wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
kwiqsilver wrote:

The scroll (or a wand, staff, etc.) would work, but you'd expend one for every day spent enchanting. A better trick would be find a first level cleric and pay him to assist you (or if you're evil, just charm him into doing it).

Multiple characters can work together to create an item. The feat, spell(s), gold, (and XP pre-Pathfinder) can all be provided by different characters.

Cast something from the Planar Binding chain of spells. The Sorcerer is the only class who has CHA as a prime req -and- has access to these spells. Summon up a being who can cast the appropriate spell, use your high CHA to get a beneficial deal, and you're done. In fact, with this trick and your UMD skill, you should be quite capable of surpassing the wizard in the area of magic item creation and use.

In theory, you could even have such a being provide the appropriate spell, the appropriate feats, the appropriate exp, etc., BUT the GM is likely to say 'no'. He's likely to be far more willing to let you get access to the appropriate spells this way. Make it a point to ensure your GM has fun roleplaying a demon negotiating with you. If he has fun doing it, he's going to be more open to you doing it the next time.

I was just pointing out the other side so the player does not expect to have these things or get them without consequences. Some players never look beyond the prize.

Demons dont normally cast spells. They have spell-like abilities. If they can cast spells they are probably advanced versions with class levels, and you as a player should stay far away from them

That's getting pedantic. The point is that there are creatures which can be summoned by planar binding spells which do cast spells.

Quibbling over whether those creatures are, technically, demons ignores the greater point that these things are often sentient, alien, and offer plenty of potential fun to roleplay negotiating with.
Dangerous? Possibly. But, then, who wants to roleplay a coward? And what kind of GM wants to encourage their players to roleplay cowards?


wraithstrike wrote:
I was just pointing out the other side so the player does not expect to have these things or get them without consequences. Some players never look beyond the prize.

That's not what you said, though. What you said was

wraithstrike wrote:
you as a player should stay far away from them

which is like telling your players not to have their PCs go adventuring because they might get hurt.


LilithsThrall wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
I was just pointing out the other side so the player does not expect to have these things or get them without consequences. Some players never look beyond the prize.

That's not what you said, though. What you said was

wraithstrike wrote:
you as a player should stay far away from them
which is like telling your players not to have their PCs go adventuring because they might get hurt.

If I say stay away, how is that not warning them to look beyond the prize? It looks like I was pointing out the other side from my PoV.

Edit: You are reaching. Don't go adventuring, and don't take unnecessary risk while adventuring are not even in the same ball park. That is the most that statement could reasonably be accused of.


wraithstrike wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
I was just pointing out the other side so the player does not expect to have these things or get them without consequences. Some players never look beyond the prize.

That's not what you said, though. What you said was

wraithstrike wrote:
you as a player should stay far away from them
which is like telling your players not to have their PCs go adventuring because they might get hurt.
If I say stay away, how is that not warning them to look beyond the prize? It looks like I was pointing out the other side from my PoV.

Okay, we've got some sort of miscommunication going on.

When I tell a player "stay away", I mean "you can't possibly get to the prize - it's suicide, like a 1st level fighter facing off against an ancient red dragon". When you say "stay away", you seem to mean "Play it smart and you've got a good chance of walking away with the prize, play it stupid and, well, I hope you've got a clean character sheet ready".

I never said that negotiating with extraplanar beings is an unnecessary risk.
For some character concepts, it's just as much a necessary risk as is a thief disarming a trap.

I'm not even sure what "unnecessary" means in this context. Is it "unnecessary" because the GM will just hand out to the player what the PC is after without taking any risks (akin to the GM waving his hand and making all trapped chests untrapped)?

That doesn't seem very fun.


LilithsThrall wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
I was just pointing out the other side so the player does not expect to have these things or get them without consequences. Some players never look beyond the prize.

That's not what you said, though. What you said was

wraithstrike wrote:
you as a player should stay far away from them
which is like telling your players not to have their PCs go adventuring because they might get hurt.
If I say stay away, how is that not warning them to look beyond the prize? It looks like I was pointing out the other side from my PoV.

Okay, we've got some sort of miscommunication going on.

When I tell a player "stay away", I mean "you can't possibly get to the prize - it's suicide, like a 1st level fighter facing off against an ancient red dragon". When you say "stay away", you seem to mean "Play it smart and you've got a good chance of walking away with the prize, play it stupid and, well, I hope you've got a clean character sheet ready".

Yeah, that is what I mean, and some players have to be specifically told there are risks. I normally have them roll a wisdom check as an excuse for me to warn them bad things may happen.


wraithstrike wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
I was just pointing out the other side so the player does not expect to have these things or get them without consequences. Some players never look beyond the prize.

That's not what you said, though. What you said was

wraithstrike wrote:
you as a player should stay far away from them
which is like telling your players not to have their PCs go adventuring because they might get hurt.
If I say stay away, how is that not warning them to look beyond the prize? It looks like I was pointing out the other side from my PoV.

Okay, we've got some sort of miscommunication going on.

When I tell a player "stay away", I mean "you can't possibly get to the prize - it's suicide, like a 1st level fighter facing off against an ancient red dragon". When you say "stay away", you seem to mean "Play it smart and you've got a good chance of walking away with the prize, play it stupid and, well, I hope you've got a clean character sheet ready".
Yeah, that is what I mean, and some players have to be specifically told there are risks. I normally have them roll a wisdom check as an excuse for me to warn them bad things may happen.

Then, do we agree?

Some characters (and Sorcerers are particularly suited to this since they have high CHA and access to Planar Binding spells) may find negotiating with extraplanar beings (such as to help create magic items) exciting. They should be encouraged to do this in the spirit of fun (akin to being encouraged to go adventuring), but, like adventuring, they should be aware that there are risks. The GM should properly balancing reward to risk just as it's done with adventuring. Getting the resources to make a magic item via such negotiations should be no more risky or rewarding than getting the resources to make that magic item via adventuring.


Yes we agree.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Sorcerer creating magic items All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions