Master Craftsman

[Christina Morris]

Has there been any sort of official clarification on this feat? It's unclear whether the feat intends for you to be able to make any magic item you could make with Craft Magic Arms & Armor or Craft Wondrous Item using your chosen skill, or if you can only make items appropriate for your chosen skill.

The feat says that "You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item," but this is somewhat ambiguous. On one reading, you can take it to mean you need to create items appropriate to your chosen skill (using the guidelines detailed in the section on Magic Item Creation, this would mean Craft (weapons) for a sword, for instance). On another, it could mean that the Craft skill replaces the Spellcraft check normally used to create the item, thus allowing you to craft a sword with Craft (trapmaking).

I have a player that's interested in using the feat and we have differing interpretations of it. If anyone can point to official clarification on the matter, that'd be great. If one of the developers could pop in to give their two cents, that'd be even greater.

[Kierato]

You can only make items appropriate to your chosen skill.

[Christina Morris]

Kierato wrote:

You can only make items appropriate to your chosen skill.

And what basis do you have for that ruling? I actually agree with you because of how the feat reads to me, but personal intuition isn't enough. The player in question has a character idea that he's really excited about that uses the other interpretation, but it loses a lot of its gusto (gadgets in the form of Wondrous Items made using trapmaking) if he can't actually make the items in question.

We need clarification one way or the other.

[Kierato]

"You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item,"
This says it pretty clearly to me, can't use craft weapon smithing to improve a cloak. Completly different.

[Christina Morris]

Kierato wrote:

"You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item,"

This says it pretty clearly to me, can't use craft weapon smithing to improve a cloak. Completly different.

It says "pretty clearly," to my player precisely the opposite. His reading of it means that you have to substitute the chosen skill for the normal Spellcraft check to make the magic item.

I understand his point of view--after all, a Wizard doesn't have to have Craft (weapons) to make a magical sword. He can make a masterwork longsword into a +1 weapon using Craft Magic Arms & Armor using Spellcraft. The player's argument is that the sentence in question is referring to the Spellcraft check you normally make to create the item if you're a spellcaster.

I don't agree with him, as I think the intent of the feat is different, but I can see that the feat itself isn't crystal clear.

That's why I'm posting here, hoping for some clarification on the matter.

[Magicdealer]

Ranks in the chosen skill count as caster level for the purposes of qualifying for the craft magic arms and armor, and craft wondrous items feat.

Note you still need those feats.

You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item. The DC to create the item still increases for any necessary spell requirements. You cannot use this feat to create any spell-trigger or spell-activation item.

Given how much the dc for a particular item is going to be bumped, and the fact that you still have to take the appropriate crafting feats, AND that the feat doesn't mention only being able to make items that require the particular skill you have, it seems reasonable to me that your chosen skill replaces the check to create whatever item you're making.

An example, perhaps? Let's say you want to craft a +2 flaming/frost/shock sword.
The caster level must be 6th, so at least 6 ranks in craft:flogging shoes or whatever.
The dc is 5+caster level required to make the item.
So base dc here is 11 for a regular caster. In order to substitute the three spells you need for flaming/frost/shock, you raise the dc by 15. That nets you a dc 26 craft check to make a total +5 equivalent sword.

The point being that, without magical assistance, the check will pretty much always be higher for the non-magical crafter.

Whether it was the intent for the feat to work that way isn't something I can comment on. However, if you don't like it, tell your player that for your campaign you're rewording it to replace:
"You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item."
With:
"The item must require the same craft skill as your chosen skill in order for you to create the item."

[Christina Morris]

Magicdealer wrote:

Whether it was the intent for the feat to work that way isn't something I can comment on. However, if you don't like it, tell your player that for your campaign you're rewording it to replace:
"You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item."
With:
"The item must require the same craft skill as your chosen skill in order for you to create the item."

I've already told him as much, but he's also frustrated that his character doesn't work and is set to abandon it as a result. Since I can see his argument, I decided to get clarification to figure out if I was actually wrong according to the intent of the rules/feat.

[Magicdealer]

Eh, what we've ended up doing in most of my campaigns is taking out the crafting feats totally, and making magic items a bit easier to find/buy. Also, after a point, there's usually a guild craftsman or magic item shop with a crafter that takes requests. The difference?

You, as DM, can always say no to an item, claim it's impossible for you to make, or plain refuse to make ten-thousand scrolls of ray of frost. If his character doesn't work, then I can see how he would be upset already and running into what he's going to view as a reduction in the power of a feat he took (and the associated skill ranks) won't make him any happier.

It's always a shame when you don't feel like you can say *yes* to a player on something like this :( If he's that close to abandoning the character, you might want to consider giving him the option to redesign his toon around the same general theme. If he knows where he went wrong, it can go a long way towards helping him enjoy the game again.

[Christina Morris]

Magicdealer wrote:

It's always a shame when you don't feel like you can say *yes* to a player on something like this :( If he's that close to abandoning the character, you might want to consider giving him the option to redesign his toon around the same general theme. If he knows where he went wrong, it can go a long way towards helping him enjoy the game again.

It's for a character he hasn't finished yet (his last character left for plot reasons so he's creating a new one). I doubt we'll get clarification on it in time, though. The whole thing probably has us both fairly frustrated. We've been going back and forth on it all day, and unfortunately we're both rather sure we're right. :)

[Lord oKOyA]

This has been discussed at length previously...

Here is a post I made in one of those such threads that may help to clear up some of the confusion. Or maybe not. ;)

Link

Cheers!

[Christina Morris]

Lord oKOyA wrote:

This has been discussed at length previously...

Here is a post I made in one of those such threads that may help to clear up some of the confusion. Or maybe not. ;)

Link

Cheers!

That's his argument in a nutshell. Rules as Written I think he's completely right. I'm not so sure on the Rules as Intended, and I'm not comfortable (to use your example) with someone learning how to Craft Magic Arms & Armor through pantomime--even if not using it directly, it was pantomime that allowed him to take Master Craftsman and thus Craft Magic Arms & Armor. It's too much of a stretch of the imagination for me.

On the other hand I'm more than willing to allow someone with Profession (author) to inscribe a cloak with an small epic about an incredibly stealthy hero to grant the wearer a bonus to Stealth checks. Thematically, there's a link there, and I suppose that's enough. Arbitrary, I suppose, but that sort of thing feels rather "fantasy" to me.

[Lord oKOyA]

First the Profession (Mime) was somebody else's example in that thread. :) I just ran with it. If you read down a few posts in that thread I have more to say about the mime portion of that example.

But in all seriousness, I think that the hang up for people is the disconnect they feel between the various possible craft and profession skills and the item(s) being enchanted.

Nobody seems to have issue with a wizard who has never wielded a sword, let alone forged one, enchanting it.

But the master dwarven sword smith who has spent his entire life crafting such weapons (and only has levels in non-caster classes) cannot because he didn't study some musty old tomes like our wizard friend?

All wizards aren't able to enchant magical items. They need a feat for it, which if boiled down is just further study is it not?

The same with sorcerers. They aren't all born with the ability to enchant... they need to focus their talents in that direction. (ie take the feat)

So why shouldn't the master dwarven sword smith be allowed to "learn" how to infuse his creations with the extraordinary? Whether it be the spirits of his ancestors or some other such fantastical explanation.

The sword smith (or mime) has shown a real dedication to an art. Honing his skills and practicing his craft. If he decides to take the next step and learn to enchant certain creations with a mystical essence, I don't see the problem.

The craft or skill used to qualify for Craft Arms and Armor is largely irrelevant in the end. That skill does not do the enchanting part of the equation... the feat does. Just the same as the "real" casters do.

Nowhere is it stated that the one doing the enchanting is also required to be the one who created the item being enchanted.

It is just a different path to the same end. One uses his manipulation of magic and the other uses his dedication to another art/spirit/manifestation/whatever.

I'm kind of rambling... but do you see what I am getting at?

And as a purely gamist response, it lets the fighters of the world craft their own magic items. I don't see the problem frankly. It hardly unbalances things as they will never be as proficient at creating magical items as their spell casting brethren.

Anyhow, that is my take on it. YMMV.

Cheers!