Is it possible to make magical items using spells from outside sources? Say, for example, a wizard with Craft Staff attempts to make a Staff of Life using either scrolls and use magic device, or a cleric friend (who provides the appropriate spells).
Yo,
"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."
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/magicItemCreation.html
2nd paragraph
|
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, [b]you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.
Activation: Staves use the spell trigger activation method,
....
The creator must have prepared the spells to be stored (or must know the spells, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) and must provide any focus the spells require as well as material component costs sufficient to activate the spell 50 times (divide this amount by the number of charges one use of the spell expends).
So:
- as a generic rule you can build magic items with outside sources;- with staves specifically you (or another spellcaster) need to be have prepared the spell so you can't use scrolls or other forms or storing devices for spells. I say that you can have another spellcaster with the right spell memorized as it was explicitly stated by SKR for potions and those have the same requirement (i.e. they require a prepared spell, not a storing device).
Interesting, I thought that you must have the spell memorized but then I found this:
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, because "you" in the case of cooperative crafting is "the people involved in crafting the item."
Not sure how I feel about this. Im going to have to think about it. - Gauss
blackbloodtroll, I have always used the other clause: must know and have prepared the spell in question.
- Gauss
Crafting cooperatively was entirely legal by raw in 3.5 also.
Crafting cooperatively was entirely legal by raw in 3.5 also.
Legal, and required for some things. A Helm of Brilliance, for instance, required a wizard/sorcerer (for Fireball), and a druid (for flame blade). A Mask of the Skull required both a cleric (Animate Objects), and a wizard (Finger of Death/Fly).
blackbloodtroll, in the games I GM pretty much all the spellcasters craft. Even the paladin is about to take craft arms and armor. *shrugs*
- Gauss
blackbloodtroll, in the games I GM pretty much all the spellcasters craft. Even the paladin is about to take craft arms and armor. *shrugs*
- Gauss
You might want to think about how many magic items you award them as treasure. Often, when an entire party chooses item creation feats, it is because they feel like they are not getting enough useful magic items as treasure.
ROFLMAO, I award them plenty of useful magic items. They typically sell them and then make their own. This has nothing to do with the equipment they get from drops (which is as per WBL). It has everything to do with getting a couple extra bonuses because they make stuff themselves.
And please, lets not turn this into another discussion about WBL and the FAQ on crafted WBL. I am ok that FAQ (at least, as far as the current rules exist, I have my own ideas about what they should be in a rebuild).
Crafted Items result in some bonuses that are easily equal to the feat the craft feat would replace.
Oh, and all the crafters have been planning to take item crafting feats since character inception. It has nothing to do with GM style (outside of the fact that I said 'yes, you will have enough time to craft').
- Gauss
I am unaware of extra bonuses a crafter gets from their crafted magic item beyond what they would get if the bought or found the item.
Mabven the OP Healer,
I craft a +3 sword for 9,000gp. The same 9,000gp would buy me a +2 sword with 1,000gp remaining. Thus: I have a +1 attack and damage from Craft Arms and Armor.
Additionally, I craft +3 armor for 4,500gp. The same 4,500gp would buy me a +2 armor with 500gp remaining. Thus: I have +1AC from Craft Arms and Armor.
Summary: Craft Arms and Armor has gotten me +1attack, +1damage, and +1AC compared to whatever I would have gotten from the feat that Craft Arms and Armor replaced +1,500gp.
Craft Wondrous Item is even more dramatic but is highly variable.
- Gauss
"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.
Wait? Does this mean that you can create items with out needing to meet minimum caster level prerequisite?
DougFungus, simple question complicated answer.
First: CL is not a prerequisite.
Second: Any magic item (including weapons and armor) that states caster level must be X level (or something similar) has a caster level prerequisite.
Third:
Some people state that the specific caster level prerequisites MUST be met and therefore cannot be bypassed by adding +5.
Other people believe that the specific caster level prerequisites are just another prerequisite and thus you may raise the DC by +5 if you do not have the level.
There has been no word from above (that I am aware of) to settle this interpretation dispute.
- Gauss
Gauss, I don't fully understand your response.
First: you're saying CL is not a prerequisite. How, Why?
Second: you say it is. I think I might be referring in my question if I'm reading things correctly.
Lets use the Keen weapon property for example.
Keen states that you must be CL 10, have Craft Magic Arms and Armor and the spell Keen Edge in order to add the bonus to your weapon.
Please elaborate, this information is relevant and useful to me.
Amulet of Natural Armor
Aura faint transmutation; CL 5th
Slot neck; Price 2,000 gp (+1), 8,000 gp (+2), 18,000 gp (+3), 32,000 gp (+4), or 50,000 gp (+5); Weight —Description
This amulet, usually crafted from bone or beast scales, toughens the wearer's body and flesh, giving him an enhancement bonus to his natural armor from +1 to +5, depending on the kind of amulet.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, barkskin, creator's caster level must be at least three times the amulet's bonus; Cost 1,000 gp (+1), 4,000 gp (+2), 9,000 gp (+3), 16,000 gp (+4), 25,000 gp (+5)
CL (first bold) is not used as the required caster level to make the item. It IS used to set the DC to craft the item (in this case 5+5 = 10). It is also used for other game related purposes not relevant to crafting.
Caster level (second bold) IS used as the caster level required to make the item.
It is this second bolded section that is in debate on whether it can be bypassed with a +5 to the DC to craft the item.
Pearl of Power: What is the caster level required to create this item?
Though the listed Caster Level for a pearl of power is 17th, that caster level is not part of the Requirements listing for that item. Therefore, the only caster level requirement for a pearl of power is the character has to be able to cast spells of the desired level.
- Gauss
Wow, I have been making a few mistakes while crafting items. Thanks for taking the time to clear things up for me. This was a big help.
NP DougFungus, the Crafting Rules are probably the single greatest problem in the game (outside of certain classes) because they were imported from 3.5 without the changes that were needed. I don't blame the developers for this, they had thier hands full with everything else. However, it still causes mass confusion.
- Gauss
Mabven the OP Healer,
I craft a +3 sword for 9,000gp. The same 9,000gp would buy me a +2 sword with 1,000gp remaining. Thus: I have a +1 attack and damage from Craft Arms and Armor.
Additionally, I craft +3 armor for 4,500gp. The same 4,500gp would buy me a +2 armor with 500gp remaining. Thus: I have +1AC from Craft Arms and Armor.
Summary: Craft Arms and Armor has gotten me +1attack, +1damage, and +1AC compared to whatever I would have gotten from the feat that Craft Arms and Armor replaced +1,500gp.
Craft Wondrous Item is even more dramatic but is highly variable.
- Gauss
Yes, but if they had found those items, and not crafted them, they would have all of that, plus 7500 GP.
How so? The WBL is the same in either case. If you find a +2sword you are now out the +1 to attack and damage that you would've gotten had you made your +3 sword for nearly the same price. You would not have any extra money (beyond the 1000gp I mentioned) because you found it.
Look, I know where this is heading. It is clear you are probably the type of GM that hands out treasure and 'what the players do with it is thier problem'. I am the type that analyzes what the players will do with it and modifies it accordingly. When they sell stuff off unexpectedly I replace it on future drops until they get the proper amount of treasure.
It is a system I don't like but its the one that Im stuck with. I have an idea on how to fix the financial/crafting system of 3.x but that is an idea that is not part of the game.
- Gauss
I give them treasure appropriate for their classes and builds, and if they feel they need to be crafting custom treasure, I take that as a sign that the treasure I am assigning is not appropriate enough, and adjust. I don't see the point of handing out enchanted longswords over and over when the party consists of a greataxe wielding barbarian, a dual-wielding light pick fighter, a wild-shape specialist druid and a controller wizard. If the party is selling off the treasure I give them, and using the proceeds to craft custom treasure, then aren't I just wasting everyone's time, and forcing them to take feats they otherwise would not choose, with no real affect on the wealth and power of the party?
Mabven the OP Healer, I don't think you understand that under the current crafting and WBL rules people can gain significant bonuses by crafting items themselves. It is not a waste of a feat and may in fact be overpowered.
Craft Arms and Armor is pretty balanced. They never result in more than +1 enhancement bonus (on weapons) over what they could otherwise acquire (from treasure or purchases). On armor and shields you can net a +2 enhancement bonus (+1 each) over what would otherwise be acquired. Not overpowered.
Craft Wondrous Item on the other hand is the single most cash saving feat in the game. It results in a considerable amount of extra power over any non-crafting feat.
A Level 10 character has 62,000gp. Let us assume he is a paladin and has taken Craft Wondrous Item. If he crafted his wondrous items using only 37,000gp of that treasure (a reasonable premise) then his 37,000gp turns into (effectively) 74,000gp.
So, without crafting and using just stat boosting items:
+3 Cloak of Resistance (9,000gp)
+2 Belt of Physical Perfection (16,000gp)
+2 Amulet of Natural Armor (8,000gp)
+2 Headband of Alluring Charisma (4,000gp)
A total increase of +5 to Fort and Ref saves, +4 to Will save, +1 attack and damage, +1hp/level, +3AC. When Smiting +1attack, +1AC.
With crafting and using just stat boosting items:
+3 Cloak of Resistance (4,500gp)
+4 Belt of Physical Perfection (20,000gp)
+2 Amulet of Natural Armor (4,000gp)
+4 Headband of Alluring Charisma (8,000gp)
500gp remaining.
A total increase of +7 to Fort and Ref saves, +5 to Will save, +2 attack and damage, +2hp/level, +4AC. When Smiting +2attack, +2AC.
Thus, in this example craft Wondrous Item (using all current rules including the FAQ) gives an increase of +2 Fort and Ref, +1Will, +1 Attack and damage, +1hp/lvl, +1AC and when Smiting +1attack and AC over not having craft wondrous item.
The +1hp/lvl alone is a feat. +1AC is a feat. +2 Fort and Ref are a feat each. etc.
Now, I am sure someone will say: but only if you give them the time to craft. A Ring of Sustenance and some decent planning is pretty well established as doing that without the GM needing to give them that.
Point is, with proper time Craft feats are easily worth the feat if using WBL as intended. If your GM is not using them as intended (as is his perogative) then dont take them.
Personally, I am developing a rebuild of the way things are bought and sold just to get rid of this element in my own games. But it isnt ready and it certainly isnt RAW or RAI.
- Gauss
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing you are not taking into account is that most treasure a party receives is in items, not straight gold or other fungible coins/items. This means that much of that WBL gets cut in half when the party sells off items they don't want (selling an item by raw nets you half the price of the item, exactly the same as the crafting cost.) So, if I award my players a pair of +1 keen light picks, and the fighter snaps them up and uses them as his primary weapons, or if I award them a pair of +1 keen sianghams, and they sell them, then use the proceeds to craft a pair of +1 keen light picks, the party is in exactly the same financial situation. So, if I, as a GM, award the party primarily items they will actually use, items they would have crafted anyway if I had not given them to the party, they end up with exactly the same WBL without spending a feat on crafting.
That is not how WBL works Mabven. That is how you may apply it in your game but that is not how it actually works in the book. If a person came into a game brand new at 10th level you go to WBL to see how much equipment (including crafted equipment which is purchased at crafted prices) they are supposed to possess.
Table 12-5 is where you hand out treasure. And that table is abour 20-30% higher (depending on the level) than WBL.
What you do is to make it pointless for any player to every take a crafting feat. I respect that. But that is not how the game is written. When posting on a rules forum you should stick to how the game is written rather than how you houserule your games.
- Gauss
^ Yikes
WBL is a guideline, not a rule. There is no sense in saying to me that I should discuss only how the game is written, when we are discussing a subject that is explicitly not written as a hard and fast rule. You can assert that crafting feats alter the balance of wealth by level, but that does not change the fact that the rules actually leave balancing wealth and treasure awards up to you. If you are saying that WBL is broken, what you are really saying is that the GM is broken.
Mabven, I am discussing WBL but then you go and state that what I state is incorrect. However, you are the one altering how WBL is written without announcing this fact. Whether it is rule or guideline you are altering the guideline while I am following it.
Summary: if you are not following a rule or guideline please do not get upset at others that do (especially in a rules forum) and then tell them they are doing it wrong by pretending you are following the rules or guidelines.
- Gauss
Oh, as a reminder: This started because you made the assertion that a GM is not doing his job if the crafters need to craft. IE: that crafting should not be a part of the game. I tried to demonstrate why (by the guidelines listed in the book) crafting not only benefits, in some cases benefits greatly. Your response to this: they are guidelines and you don't follow them.
I am not saying anyone is doing anything wrong, you, me or anyone else who has participated in the discussion. I have offered advice on a subject which the rules state we should use discretion on. Yes there are tables. But there is also a lot of text which uses equivocators like "should", "are expected", "in general", etc. Some encounters will award no treasure, even though the table gives a number on how much treasure it should award. Some encounters will award multiples of the per-encounter treasure value. It is up to you to balance this. Likewise, it is up to you to choose what treasure each encounter does award, so how am I not doing what is written by choosing to make those treasure awards actually relevant to the players at my table? I have yet to see a rule that says "you must award frustratingly irrelevant treasure a majority of the time. Reference table 12-5a to determine by level, exactly what percentage of the time treasure will be actually useful to the character receiving it."
Point 1) I do an inventory of any character at any level and if you are following WBL (which I do) it should be somewhere near WBL. The treasure drops at that point are meaningless because if the treasure is sold you still have to add more to bring them up to WBL.
Point 2) Crafters who craft count only the craft prices towards WBL. Thus they wind up with more effective power for the crafting feat.
Point 3) I personally do not like this system as it is a hell of alot of work for me to make sure everyone has the proper (via WBL) equipment. However, I am writing up a system for my own personal use that will remove this issue from my table. But until then I am a follower of WBL as written. I discuss anything to do with treasure, equipment drops, and crafting from the WBL guidelines. I admit this up front.
- Gauss
Edit: This is my idea
And I would be very curious to see the text of the rule that you have paraphrased as your Point 2). You state it as if it's a fact, but I have never seen any such rule.
- Gauss
BTW, now it is clear why you didn't understand my position. You were unaware of this FAQ.
- Gauss
And nothing in what SKR said overrides what the rulebook itself says, which is that WBL is a guideline. There is no way to always have your PC's have exactly WBL. There are going to be times at 10th level when he has significantly more wealth than other times also at 10th level. This is the nature of the game. To treat WBL as a rule that must be complied with, and by extension a party with crafting feats must have exactly double the amount of wealth as a party without crafters, is to miss the point. Yes, having a crafting feat has its advantages, and as a GM you should allow a player with those feats to experience those advantages, but to shackle yourself to a table which in its own description says that it is a rough guide is missing the point of the entire section of the rulebook that WBL is contained in.
BTW, now it is clear why you didn't understand my position. You were unaware of this FAQ.
- Gauss
No, I am entirely aware of that faq, and the 2000 post argument that ensued from said faq. It's just that I treat the Gamemastering section of the CRB as it was intended - advice to a GM on how to smoothly run a game, and not a set of regulations with which a rules laywer player can torment his/her GM.
I did not state exact values must be maintained. In fact I stated I use approximates.
Crafter under WBL: anything they crafted contributes only the crafting cost to WBL.
Non-crafter under WBL: straight (full price) values.
Thus, crafters get a bonus for the feat. This was the premise way back when you and I started this 'discussion'. This premise appears to have been forgotten. Anything that detracts from this bonus should be told to the players so they do not choose the feat. In your games it is clear they should not choose to craft. In my games I follow WBL closely and thus crafting is fine.
Anyhow, I think we are going in circles. We play different styles of games. As long as both tables have fun things are fine. My players have fun.
- Gauss
That FAQ entry also says that doubling WBL is the intention of the crafting feats. If you change that, you're intentionally devaluing the craft feats. (Your proposed changes, for example, would make them basically worthless. You get the same thing by going to the right store.)
MagiMaster, who is 'you' in your last comment?
If it is me, my changes in the houserule forum also include a change to the craft feats (basically thier effective removal).
- Gauss
Doh. I forgot about that part. :P
Still, I like crafting my own stuff. I like making unique items. I don't get to do it often because I usually have most of what I need already and I don't have the in-game time to do it. (If I were houseruling, I'd remove the arbitrary 1000 gp a day limit to make crafting a bit easier.)
Your analysis is a worst-case and almost never comes up in game, with two exceptions. First, like you mentioned, a new high-level character can have all the backstory-time they want to make stuff. Second, in a Kingmaker-like game where there's loads and loads of downtime. Your paladin from earlier would require about a month to make all that. In a lot of games, everything's over in a few weeks.
Well, whatever. I've lost track of the conversation anyway, and it's your game, not mine. I just get tired of all the lets-nerf-crafting threads.
That FAQ entry also says that doubling WBL is the intention of the crafting feats. If you change that, you're intentionally devaluing the craft feats. (Your proposed changes, for example, would make them basically worthless. You get the same thing by going to the right store.)
If this is directed to me, I make no changes at all, crafting has its benefits, but I do award players items which are useful to them, and which they would craft if they had the feat. This is entirely within my purview, and is in no way a variance from the WBL guidelines. Just because I make crafting less essential does not mean I in any way remove the benefit of being a crafter. I merely remove the urgency with which players feel they need the crafting feats. Players are quite welcome to take whatever fungible treasure I award and use it to craft whatever they want. They are also welcome to sell non-fungible treasure I hand out and craft something new, but they have no desire to, because those items are actually useful to them.
I think that's part of the expectations behind the craft feats. I also agree that giving a party of non-casters a metamagic rod (say bouncing, 11000 gp) isn't the same as giving them 11000 gp. Whether they have Master Craftsman or not, they're almost certainly going to sell it and end up with 5500 gp.
If they craft a +2 sword (4000 gp), you should count the cost against WBL, but I don't think it's right to count the rod's price against WBL in this case.
... I'm rambling again. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait! I get it now! I am actually being cruelly unfair to my players by giving them exactly the treasure they want. By doing so, I am forcing them into the position of having to entirely game the system by taking the +5 vorpal greataxe I awarded them, sell it, and use the proceeds to craft a +5 vorpal greataxe, just so they can maximize their WBL. I'm such a stinker.
Actually, your sarcastic comment about summed it up Mabven. :D
MagiMaster, my new idea (we really should talk about it in that thread) still grants the option to craft. But you get no monetary benefit from crafting. The main benefit would be that you can customize your own equipment and that you won't have to hunt around for a peice of equipment if it is normally unavailable. Neither of these benefits are worth a feat hence my change.
- Gauss