Houserule feat change


Homebrew and House Rules


Hello,
I am new to pathfinder (was playing 3.5 off and on for the past 3ish years with a group of mates and we moved over to pathfinder around a month ago) and I will be DMing a campaign starting this Saturday. This will be my first time GMing a campaign (although I have DM’d one off sessions before, although only a couple of times). I’m sure I’ll be all over these boards this week as I look for feedback for my material and house-rules.
For now I want to ask for some input on a house rule to the ‘Master Craftsman’ feat. I have independent motivations for something like this based on my campaign, but for now I’ll leave those out as I think that this change is a fair change to the feat without my campaign specific considerations. However, I’m basically here looking to see how people feel so if you disagree please put a post in!

What would you think of the following house rule?

Master craftsman: +2 competency bonus with X crafting skill and you can use either craft magic arms and amour or craft wondrous item when creating items of the type appropriate to X crafting skill.
Pre-req: 5 ranks in the appropriate craft and a purple hat that has been worn on a monkey for at least seven consecutive hours*.
Now it is still a lot worse than the caster version (it only applies to a part of the feat like now and as discussed in this thread: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/craftingMagicItemsQuestion) but you sink only a single feat into it instead of multiple. I think that this is fairer. In addition you don't have to wait until level 7 to get it, though you still have to wait until later then a caster.

Keen to hear feedback, I know it won’t fit some campaigns (who want to, for 'fluff' reasons keep crafting to the wizards/ect) but from a balance point of view I think casters get quite enough without having to make the non-casters take two feats, a skill AND still not be able to use all of the crafting feat.
Basically, I can’t see any reason to make it take two feats when it’s already considerably worse because of other considerations.

Thanks for any feedback!

*Note: as a final note, I’m thinking I’ll drop the purple hat requirement… Maybe…


I personally never agreed that being a Master Craftsman could suddenly allow you to make magical items.

There are very few examples of it in fiction (even Theros Ironfeld had help from the silver arm and from Dragons).

And I honestly think they could have fixed their own crafting rules via this feat. ie the amount of work it takes to complete the item is in gp per day instead of per week, or something along those lines.

Then make another feat called Magical Artisan or something, which allows you to do what this version of Master Craftsman does.

I honestly don't like either version of the feat, so I am mostly an unfair person to offer advice on this.

I will say however, DO NOT BE AFRAID TO EXPERIMENT!!! Try the rules out for a bit, and if you like them, use them. If you don't like them, toss them.

And I would efinitely leave in the monkey hat requirement, if only to watch the pc's scramble for a monkey! :)


Swordsmasher wrote:


There are very few examples of it in fiction (even Theros Ironfeld had help from the silver arm and from Dragons).

Middle Earth. Had like 10 wizards in the entire world througout all of history, but it seemed that you couldn't go through a single troll encounter without picking up 10 specific magic weapons forged by elven or dwarven smiths.

Since most people agree that spellcasting is already an unsurmountably broken advantage that non-casters will never be able to make up for, I wish that they hadn't also made casting classes, the undisputed magic item manufacturers. I wish the master craftsman feat was on steroids. In fact I don't even think it should be a feat. I just think crafts people who also have a few ranks in spellcraft should be able to make magic items. In a world of magic, craftspeople should be better at crafting things... even magic ones, than blastercasters. As it is, they can barely craft mundane items with any efficiency, and casters still do it way better with Fabricate. By the time most casters are a high enough level to make magic items, they have enough spells to break the entire world's economy as it is, there is very little incentive for them to make and sell magic items. They don't even need money, they can cast spells that give them magical mansions, and food, and whatever else they need. So where do all of our magic shops get their goodies? Lame NPC crafts people, that's where.


I am a Low magic guy. My campaigns are mostly Sword and Sorcery.

Middle Earth: Yeah, but those 10 wizards were more angelic beings than actual wizards. They were calld Istari I believe. I am not googling all the spelling terms because I am short on time.

Tolkein's elves were almost as powerful as the wizards, and way more powerful than your typical Pathfinder elf.

And most of those weapons they discovered were old, many dating back to the second age, or even older, to the wars against Melkor and Morgoth and all that.

But we could debate this to death (see Gandalf Was Only a 5th Level Magic-User).

If you are running a high magic campaign, and that is your style of play, and it is stated that most people use magic in some way (Eberron as an example) then by all means allow something along those lines.

I personally feel that magic item creation should stay in the hands of those capable of wielding magic, or at least your crafter should have a magic-user nearby to enchant it.

A good example of this would be the Dragonslayer movie from the 80's.

However, I can see that someone with enough ranks in Knowledge (Arcana), Use Magic Device, or some other similar skill, could also be allowed to craft magical items in some way without actually being a spell caster. Again, depends on your style of play.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Houserule feat change All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.