Goblin Squad Member
|
I can’t say I agree with crafter requiring multiple people to make an item. I respect that you will need help gathering the materials as a crafter just won’t have the means to defend him/herself adequately. But if I need to constantly rely on others to make the (high end) items, it’s really going to hamstring them and lessen the desire to play a crafter.
I really don’t have a problem with going to another skill tree for the enchantment skill, as long as I am not required to stay in that archetype to gain a capstone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not requiring multiple stages to crafting with different components produced by different skills pretty much kills a good portion of the economy. The supply chain and crafting specialization are absolutely essential to an effective economy.
You could learn enough to do it all on your own, but you would lag far behind specialists that buy their parts from other specialists.
I really don’t have a problem with going to another skill tree for the enchantment skill, as long as I am not required to stay in that archetype to gain a capstone.
Capstones aren't even a thing anymore. You get a bonus for having all of your abilities equipped from a single class. So for regular crafting periods you equip only your crafter abilities. When it comes time to do enchantments you unequip all of your crafting abilities and equip your enchanting abilities and you get whatever bonuses a wizard or whatever might get to enchanting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
+2 THAC0
Your age is showing again. =P
Now, to actually add something to the conversation, from the discussion that have taken place with the devs, I get the feeling the line between magic and mundane item may be a bit fuzzier in PFO than tabletop, with mention of much more granularity in the bonuses granted.
If that line is going to be blurred, I think it's fair to say that expecting crafters to be able to produce and enchant items is not out of line. Though I'd personally like to see it as a two stage process. You take your raw mats, your steel and leather and wood, and mix them together into, example, a spear. It's a nice spear, suitable for the stabbing of bad (or good, as you will) men, but it's still just a spear. Next comes the phase of binding true power into that to make it something impressive.
In essence a "spear" is the output of the processing of raw materials into something useful, and the magic spear is the output of the actual work of craft and creation. A crafter could keep a dozen raw spears on hand to enchant as his customer's comission.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What if enchantments were applied by spellcasters to runes, crystals, gems, and rare polished woods which the crafter might purchase from the enchanter and then incorporate in his finished masterpiece? Such components might only have the +2 THAC0 or +1 strength or what have you?
WOOT THACO!!! You are showing your age my friend....and I am showing mine by knowing exactly what that is lol.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Capstones aren't even a thing anymore.
Sure they are:
We also wanted to capture the idea from the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game that dedication to one path would have additional benefits. Therefore, if your character chooses to stay committed to one of these archetypes until it has achieved all 20 archetype merit badges, your character will earn an additional capstone ability! (A character can train in many other skills outside of their archetype skill tree and still progress towards the capstone ability—they just need to avoid training in the skill tree of a different archtype. Don't worry—if you accidentally start to train a skill tree outside your archetype, you'll be warned, the consequences will be explained, and you'll have a chance to change that decision before it's irrevocable!)
This is not suggesting that you have to simply equip the right abilities together, but that you must remain loyal to that class archetype for 20 'levels.'
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Capstones aren't even a thing anymore.Sure they are:
This is not suggesting that you have to simply equip the right abilities together, but that you must remain loyal to that class archetype for 20 'levels.'
We also wanted to capture the idea from the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game that dedication to one path would have additional benefits. Therefore, if your character chooses to stay committed to one of these archetypes until it has achieved all 20 archetype merit badges, your character will earn an additional capstone ability! (A character can train in many other skills outside of their archetype skill tree and still progress towards the capstone ability—they just need to avoid training in the skill tree of a different archtype. Don't worry—if you accidentally start to train a skill tree outside your archetype, you'll be warned, the consequences will be explained, and you'll have a chance to change that decision before it's irrevocable!)
Actually he pulled back on that afterward, Keign: It is just the skills equipped and they are now 'focus' or 'dedication' rather than capstones.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well the gist of it as i have understood up until now:
1. Crafting and enchanting will be separate skill trees from the "class" or combat trees. So in theory anybody can enchant and in theory you can play this game without ever leveling in one of the 11 archetypes.
2. HOWEVER, crafting and enchanting will be tied to ability scores just like all other other trees. So if enchanting is INT based and blacksmithing is STR based, then most enchanters will in fact have wizard levels and most blacksmiths will be melee characters and most leatherworkers (dex) will belong to light armor classes.
That's how I understand it will work, my question is what about Cleric/Druid enchanters? Will there be a separate skill for Blessing items?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If the main intent of PFO is meaningful player interaction it makes sense that creation of complex (read magical) items requires a team effort. I believe that there will also be a consumable component to most items (armor polish, sharpening stones, etc.). This would again seem to argue for teamwork (if only in the economy of trade) as a major facet of crafting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not requiring multiple stages to crafting with different components produced by different skills pretty much kills a good portion of the economy. The supply chain and crafting specialization are absolutely essential to an effective economy.
You could learn enough to do it all on your own, but you would lag far behind specialists that buy their parts from other specialists.
Ok, I see what you are saying in regards to multiple stages of crafting. I agree with this. As I said though, I did plan on trying to be as complete a crafter I can be, which would include taking several specialities. But it really depended on how the skill trees were split up on how I decided as such, not enough details yet.
Capstones aren't even a thing anymore. You get a bonus for having all of your abilities equipped from a single class. So for regular crafting periods you equip only your crafter abilities. When it comes time to do enchantments you unequip all of your crafting abilities and equip your enchanting abilities and you get whatever bonuses a wizard or whatever might get to enchanting.
Interesting, I had not heard of that. I will need to read up more on that. It's in a thread titled "Capstones"?
Well the gist of it as i have understood up until now:
1. Crafting and enchanting will be separate skill trees from the "class" or combat trees. So in theory anybody can enchant and in theory you can play this game without ever leveling in one of the 11 archetypes.
2. HOWEVER, crafting and enchanting will be tied to ability scores just like all other other trees. So if enchanting is INT based and blacksmithing is STR based, then most enchanters will in fact have wizard levels and most blacksmiths will be melee characters and most leatherworkers (dex) will belong to light armor classes.
That's how I understand it will work, my question is what about Cleric/Druid enchanters? Will there be a separate skill for Blessing items?
This I would not have a problem with. But I have not heard this is how it will be. Do you have a source where you have read this?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think folks are overthinking it a little bit...
In order to produce a given item, you....
- Have to obtain the raw materials that go into it (either by purchasing them or getting them yourself)
- Process those materials into workable components (or purchase said components).
- Assemble the components into a finnished item.
That's how the system so far has been described by GW. A "crafter" can learn skills in any or all of the above steps. It doesn't matter whether the item is a step-ladder or a +5 flaming-greatsword.
I assume different types of skills for different types of item. So for assembling X type of magic item, the player learns whatever goes into assembling that type of magic item as part of that skill...that would include "enchanting" or whatever themeaticaly you view it as...it's the same thing mechanicaly.
That skill of "assemble magic item X" is entirely seperate from "cast fireball". A single character could learn both or one or neither.
That's probably even aside from the idea that there are certain raw materials (e.g. mithril) that have inherint magical properties.... but mechanicaly it's harvest, process, assemble. Adventuring is an entirely seperate set of skills.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Found the Capstone replacement quote
So we got a chance to pitch this to the team today and everyone seems to like it, so we're now putting it up here for feedback :) . This is based pretty heavily on some of the the earlier suggestions from DarkLightHitomi and GrumpyMel.
The main thing we want to achieve with this system remains keeping optimized multi-role builds from being far more desirable than single-role builds. This keeps the role feeling more special/distinct, and also doesn't penalize players that don't really pay much attention to optimization from feeling outclassed by others that do (e.g., we don't want to see "You're just a pure Fighter? No, I think we'll hold out for a Fighter/Barbarian/Rogue or a Fighter/Paladin/Ranger for our melee character.").
We've heard and agree with all your arguments about how a carrot at the end of the progression doesn't really achieve this, and that you don't want to be locked out of getting a capstone.
So what we're proposing now is the idea of a "Dedication" or "Focus" bonus.
Essentially, whenever you only have feats from one role slotted (rounded out with generic feats that aren't role-specific), you'll gain a bonus to doing what that role is supposed to do. This bonus is pegged to making the pure build competitive with the best synergistic multi-role build, may shift over time as new synergies are discovered, and may scale up in power based on your level (becoming similar in power to tabletop's Capstone at 20th level if high-level synergies are really powerful).
For example, if we decide that Paladins are supposed to be the best in the game at melee damage vs. evil targets, but testing determines that there's a synergistic Paladin/Ranger/Fighter build that does better without losing any real effectiveness in other areas, we may tweak the Paladin Dedication bonus to increase Smite Evil damage. This gives us the ability to shore up specific corner-case issues without having to rebalance the feats of a whole role (which may propagate out to cause further issues).
Your bonus is entirely dependent on what you have slotted, not what you know. If you build a Fighter 5/Barbarian 5, you get the Fighter bonus if you only slot Fighter feats, the Barbarian bonus if you only slot Barbarian feats, and no bonus while you slot feats from both (or neither) roles. And there may remain situations where you prefer the synergy of two or more roles to whatever the individual bonus is. If we scale the bonus in power by level, it will likely be based on the highest-tier feat you have slotted.
Thoughts?
Thread link http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p5df&page=1?Roles-and-Role-advantages
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hobbun: The first part Is in the blogs. They have made it pretty clear you can be a dedicated crafter.
The second part, um, I think I made it up and just assumed it would be like that...
I do think they have mentioned that crafting will be skills and thats how the other skills work. If I'm wrong maybe we should suggest it? Sounds like the happy medium.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope only magic users will be able to craft magical items, and their magical ability, along with a skill tied to transferring that ability, determines the potency of the outcome.
In order to enchant something with a spell, you should know that spell.
I don't want to see a 'generalist' crafter be viable for anything other than the most basic items, nothing with high profit. There should be aspects of crafting tied into many skills, to get to the top of a crafting field, you should have to do things in other fields. People should be forced into contracting, friends, or using the market, no matter how skilled they are.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here is what i would like to see.
Crafting objects needs to be seperate from enchanting objects. Both crafting and enchanting needs to have multipule skill trees.
Crafting - This is making a physical mundane object. As your you train your skills more you can go from making just steel swords to eventually 1) Make masterwork items 2) Create items from different materials (say cold iron or mithril or adamantine), even a ring could be adamantine, it would be a status symbol 3) give you more options on the look of the item, Someone who masters swordsmithing might be able to make 50 different long swords while an apprentice can only make 5.
Crafting only generates mundane objects, unless the material has a special property.
possible trees for crafting
smelting. This would be knowing how to make ignots that smiths would use. Higher skill allows you to smelt special materials
Weaponsmithing
armorsmithing
jewelrycrafting
Fletching
tailor
...etc
Enchanting - Enchanting is the process of imbueing a mundane item with magical powers.
Enchanting would require a crafted item that is either masterwork (in the case of weapons/armor) or very high quality (basically masterwork equivalent for rings/robes/necklaces..etc.)
Enchanting would have several trees based on what you want to enchant. Wondrous items, magical arms and armor...etc.
Higher skill allows you to cut down the time to create the items, and to enchant special materials. So you would be able to start off enchanting steel swords but need higher skill for mithril.
In order to enchant an object you need either 1) the ability to cast the spells or 2) an appropriate skill (for divine or arcane) and a scroll of the spell.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope only magic users will be able to craft magical items, and their magical ability, along with a skill tied to transferring that ability, determines the potency of the outcome.
In order to enchant something with a spell, you should know that spell.
I don't want to see a 'generalist' crafter be viable for anything other than the most basic items, nothing with high profit. There should be aspects of crafting tied into many skills, to get to the top of a crafting field, you should have to do things in other fields. People should be forced into contracting, friends, or using the market, no matter how skilled they are.
The problem I have with this is you aren't required to go into other archetypes to fully raise your own.
For example, if you want to be a dedicated Fighter, you don't need to go into Wizard. Likewise with Wizard, you don't need to go into the Fighter skill trees.
If I want to be a dedicated Crafter, I shouldn't need to take levels of Wizard (or another casting class), either.
I don't have a problem of taking a general, available to all, 'enchanting skill tree', but I shouldn't have to actually go into Wizard to do so.
Maybe our versions of dedicated crafter are different. But I do feel if I am going to spend my 2.5 years of being a dedicated Crafter, if I am going to gain 20 merit badges in crafting, I certainly hope I will be able to make more than just mundane items.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While the idea of enchanting an already crafted item works for many weapons, armor, rings and such it could get tricky when attempting to create wondrous items.
Ultimately I would prefer that anyone dedicated enough to crafting (assembling) can create a magic item but how that is going to be accomplished seems to be just speculation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This 2.5 year number, and the assumption that crafting will be equivalant to archetypes needs to go away.
2.5 years is the target time to go from zero to 20 badges in an archetype with no side training and flawless execution of badge requirements. The number will probably be closer to 3-4 years for most people. 2.5 is when the first 20th badge characters come into the game, not some time frame everyone will hit no matter their ability/strategy.
People requested to have crafting be like an archetype, I don't recall any GW post making it seem like reaching master crafter will be equivalent to master of an archetype.
Yes, you don't have to train as a wizard to be a be a dedicated fighter. But in order to enchant something you need to be trained in magic.
You shouldn't have to go directly into wizard, but if you want to use arcane enchantments, you need training in arcane magic first. If you want to do a divine enchantment you need training in divine magic. If you want to do the in-game equivalent of a 9th level PnP spell, you should have training to use that spell.
Someone who takes no risks and sits in town crafting should see little profit most of their coin should be going into the contracts and market purchases required to gather necessary materials, and they should have to work much harder than people who are getting their hands dirty.
There should be many skills involved in the crafting professions, some should cross with combat oriented skills, and archetypes should provide unique training for certain forms of crafting/enchanting.
I wouldn't mind, 20th badge wizards being the best arcane enchanters in the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Maybe our versions of dedicated crafter are different. But I do feel if I am going to spend my 2.5 years of being a dedicated Crafter, if I am going to gain 20 merit badges in crafting, I certainly hope I will be able to make more than just mundane items.
Masterwork are not exactly mundane, but neither are they magical.
Vorpal blades I am thinking might be nonenchanted, but L20 craft. If a vorpal blade is enchanted it becomes a +2 or greater vorpal sword. Anyone remember?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
People requested to have crafting be like an archetype, I don't recall any GW post making it seem like reaching master crafter will be equivalent to master of an archetype.
Actually, I think Goblinworks has implied this pretty heavily:
We want being a soldier to be as fulfilling and interesting a long-term play experience as being an adventurer or a crafter.
This puts 'adventurer' archetypes and 'crafter' archetypes on the same level, as well as soldiering types, etc.
These dungeons may spawn quest threads that take you to other dungeons, or be a source of unique resources needed for certain highly specialized crafting jobs.
This implies that there will be very high level, very specialized crafting. Sounds like that requires a full archetype to me.
As a crafter, you'll need to seek out knowledge to ply your trade. You'll be searching for the training needed to master skills and earn merit badges associated with each type of product you wish to produce. Over time, you'll learn more exotic variations and ways to fine-tune items to meet specific market needs. Good crafters are a combination of scholar and smith; you'll learn by doing, and will constantly seek more knowledge to expand your skill set.
And this sounds exactly like what we are supposed to do in order to advance our more classic archetypes, like Wizard or Fighter.
Overall, I'd say that Goblinworks has made it seem that they do intend to treat crafting to be its own full, fleshed out archetype. Perhaps they will even have more than one.
That said, I believe that the ability to craft enchanted items should work its way into the Crafter archetype around halfway to Mastery, obviously gaining access to higher levels as you progress.
However, crafting a magical item of any kind should also require magical reagents, or the assistance of one who can cast magical spells using their spells to assist you. This would likely depend on the level of the spell and the type of magic being cast. It's good for the economy, it allows Wizards and Crafters both to maintain their specialization (because what about the wizards that don't really care to enchant things, but they need those merit badges to get the bonuses they want?), and it is good for the all-important Meaningful Character Interaction.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The system that EVE uses requires recipes to be able to craft items in the game. The transporting of the highest level of these recipes becomes a very dangerous task that causes bandits to try and figure out when and where the transport will happen. In addition to these recipes being only craftable by the highest level crafters, it takes a tremendous amount of research to discover them in the first place. Once learned you can then work on refining a recipe to make it better and better. So the stats of Magic Item X would be different from the same item crafted by someone who had taken the time to refine the item.
I don't think it should be so much that a caster is needed to craft as much as it should be that dedicated crafters who put time and effort in should be making better items than those that "dip" into crafting. Of course this type of system would need to be altered to work with a fantasy setting better but ultimately having a very robust crafting system is nearly the same as adding additional classes to the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thank you, Keign. I was going to give what was probably going to a relatively length response to Valkenr, but you pretty much covered it.
Although I want to address one thing. What I think 'should' go away is the assumption that just because in the Pathfinder tabletop version of magic item creation you need to be a caster type, means it must be that way in PFO, as well.
To say "to enchant, you must be trained in magic" is an assumption based on Pathfinder PP. Who knows how it will be done in PFO? Maybe there won't even be enchanting, maybe just with your great skill in crafting you are able to imbue the item with magical essence.
But whatever GW decides, I do feel that crafter's should have access, in their skill tree, the ability to craft magical items. Not 'borrow' from a Wizard, a Cleric or another caster. The crafter 'archetype' is the one doing the creating, they should have the means to create.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree with you to some extent, Hobbun - but I really think it would be better to require a caster, or a caster-created item to create certain types of magical items.
This is not because I want Crafters to be incapable of independence, but because I see that as an ingredient for a deeper and more robust trade system. The crafter still does the crafting - but the magic has to come from somewhere, just like the other materials do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For myself I think it would require the greatest skill for a crafter untrained in magic to craft magical items: However, it may be that crafting to a very high level of skill might also be a kind of magical training. L20 skill can be considered superhuman. It is not a stretch to entertain the notion that superhuman mastery is magical.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree with you to some extent, Hobbun - but I really think it would be better to require a caster, or a caster-created item to create certain types of magical items.
This is not because I want Crafters to be incapable of independence, but because I see that as an ingredient for a deeper and more robust trade system. The crafter still does the crafting - but the magic has to come from somewhere, just like the other materials do.
I can see your point. But the issue I have is the crafter seems to be the most dependent 'archetype'. No other archetype relies on other archetypes as much crafters just to use their skills.
I understand the whole aspect of character interaction and a good economy in trading, but the crafter is already very dependent on others in attaining materials in general with gathering. Not only from getting powerful materials from creatures, but just trying to do normal mining, which is something a single crafter cannot do.
So there is no way a single crafter will be independent with just having to gather materials alone. I feel that by itself is enough to be dependent on others, than to also have to trade for magical components, as well.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think you seriously under estimate everyone else's reliance on crafters. I suspect that loot in this game won't regular put out a cool magical sword to use but come primarily in the form of gear the players stopped using a long time ago and crafting components. Adventurers will be absolutely tied to the crafters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
I can see your point. But the issue I have is the crafter seems to be the most dependent 'archetype'. No other archetype relies on other archetypes as much crafters just to use their skills.
...
The glass half empty still holds something.
The dedicated crafter is likely to be the wealthiest of players. With wealth comes great power. You should be able to afford an army to carry you across to the far places to find the rarest treasures, retain wizards to cast at your command.
Do not limit yourself so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No one is truly independent. Soldiers require soldiers to make a formation. Healers need injuries to heal. Miners need protection. Adventurers work best as a team.
I will have to side with Keign on this. Training to craft magical items, weapons, and armor is the pinnacle of a crafters profession. But without actually training in magic themselves, they are still going to need that resource. I wouldn't expect a crafter to know the intricacies of a soul siphon spell, but I would expect them to know how to copy and implement the proper ingredients and runes into a sword.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's hard to say how much magical items will swing the power of a character. You may be right, archetypes may be very dependent on items created by crafters.
However, from my understanding, crafters will make the most powerful items, but not necessarily 'all' of them. A fighter can buy a long sword, shield, armor, etc. at a settlement, just the same a Wizard can buy spells. And they can play their character just fine most of the time with their skills alone.
But with a crafter, he needs to rely on others most times. And I don't necessarily mean just with higher items that may be magical, but the normal items as well, which will need to be harvested (and a lot of times, will need protection and crews).
So just to make something even mundane, a crafter will need to rely on others.
Maybe I am wrong, but from how I understand it the crafter seems to be very dependent already. So that is why I feel the added dependency in making magical items is more than needed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
how about this.
you want to play a pure enchanter but dont want to play a spell caster. In the enchanting skill tree you have a group of skills. Emulate Wizard Spell level 1, level 2...etc. Emulate Druid, emulate cleric.
Your pure enchanter buys a mithril longsword and a Scroll of 9th Level Spell from the open market. The enchanter is able through his skill training to transfer the magic of the scroll to the longsword and thus make Mithril Longsword of Spell Level 9 Death.
So, in this case being a spellcaster training in enchanting has a benefit, you dont have to train those extra skills. However it also has a downside, you are training in spellcaster archtype and not enchanting.
This also has the advantage of having scrolls being an important part of not only adventuring (combat) but also the crafting/enchanting side of the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Hobbun: I feel that all of this implies rather strongly that the VAST majority of items you depend on a crafter to make. And it explicitly states that you can only get 'useless newbie' tools for camp construction from NPCs, anything more advanced is built by crafters. It only makes sense that the same would be true for other types of objects.
Pathfinder Online is based around the idea that virtually every object in the game world that player characters interact with is created by other characters. While not everyone who plays the game will make things, everyone will be using things that other people have made.-SNIP-
we want to find ways to make each of these systems the hub of a network of content that connects player characters together economically and politically. Our design goals here are maximizing human interaction and encouraging the players to create content for one another.
-SNIP-
Camps are fairly simple to build and require very basic components; the most basic camps can be built with materials that can be purchased from NPCs, so there's always a way to get started, even for new characters. The more complex (and valuable) a resource is, though, the more complicated the camp must be to extract it. As complexity increases, so does the requirement for skills and merit badges to complete the construction, and the components that are needed to extract higher-valued resources will usually be produced primarily by other player characters.
-SNIP-
whenever a hex is being developed, people will want to create new buildings and structures which in turn require many types of components and support that must be provided by crafters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One more quote that I can no longer edit into my previous post about Crafters being their own archetype:
While we've focused somewhat on adventurers in this blog, it is our intention to give other types of characters similar goals and objectives—and similar rewards. If you choose to focus on crafting, you should be able to become an epic crafter with the perks and recognition due such a character. As development proceeds, we'll share more of our ideas about that with the community, and we'll get your feedback as we shape those plans.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ok, thanks for the quotes, Keign. I do recall the general statement of how crafters were going to be relatively equal to the classed archetypes, but could not remember the specifics on what was said, thanks for reposting that.
Also, I’m really curious how camps (for extracting resources) will work in relation to the gathering skills. This is what I’m referring to in particular:
Camps are fairly simple to build and require very basic components; the most basic camps can be built with materials that can be purchased from NPCs, so there's always a way to get started, even for new characters. The more complex (and valuable) a resource is, though, the more complicated the camp must be to extract it. As complexity increases, so does the requirement for skills and merit badges to complete the construction, and the components that are needed to extract higher-valued resources will usually be produced primarily by other player characters.
I’m guessing the more complex requirements to extract resources, and the higher merit badges to go along with it, will be associated with the gathering skill tree.
I like how detailed and complex it appears to be, and looking forward to when GW can detail how it all works.
I really hope we do get detailed info on skills before the Early Enrollment begins, so we just aren’t testing what skill leads to what in the early game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then why not make that ‘enchanting tree’ part of the crafter tree, at least in regards to enchanting items. Obviously a Wizard will have his enchantment spells, which would not be part of a crafter tree.Not missing the point. The idea that we're talking about is that learning to enchant an item doesn't require you to be a full-fledged wizard, cleric, bard, etc..Correct but it should require you invest some time learning some of the skills in order to be able to "unlock" the enchanting skill tree.Because enchanting an item is NOT crafting. It is taking a finished product and then adding magic too it.
That's a pretty narrow vision of enchanting, but one which is favoured by the tabletop rules because those rules are really just a means of quickly handwaving long periods of in-game crafting work to get back to what the tabletop game focuses on, which is adventuring (i.e. combat). I hope this game will take a more interesting and engaging approach to crafting.
There are alternate ways of implementing enchanting. In the following I refer to the one who is placing the magic on the item as the "caster", and the one who physically forges/creates the item as the "crafter" - they can potentially be the same person. (Obviously this is not an exhaustive list.)
* One fairly common approach is to view the crafting of magic items as a separate field of magical study entirely, often called artificing, but that kind of devalues the standard crafter as they could only make "trash" (i.e. nonmagical items) which the artificer would use.
* You could place one enchantment on the blade, and another on the hilt, and then a further enchantment to bind them together successfully. Higher skills would allow the creation of more complex enchantments. This would directly implicate the caster at specific points during the crafting rather than simply making use of a finished product, but the caster and the crafter don't need any overlapping skills.
* Enchant the metal itself before forging it into something useful. This reverses the enchantment requirements: Magic-using types provide the base materials (enchanted metal) and crafters produce the final product.
* Something about the chosen crafting process itself imbues the enchantment (e.g. the mage-smith, dwarven rune-mason, etc). In other words, the crafter is the caster. Somewhat like the artificer mentioned above, but really this is simply a crafter who doesn't need a caster involved at all in the process to make magic items (but that doesn't mean they can cast spells like a caster). To me, personally, this is the most compelling form of crafting from the perspective of a player (because I find those archetypes fascinating). It also decouples the crafting of magic items from the spells that casters use, so that there doesn't need to be any kind of relation between what spells exist and what enchantments are possible.
Ultimately though, regardless of the specific details, my main desire for crafting is to avoid a system where top-level crafters are fungible. I want player skill to matter in the crafting of an item (not the gathering, not the marketing, not the selling - though those are all areas where player skill should matter as well), so that when you're choosing who to hit up for crafting - just like you were choosing a tank or a healer for your party - you can look at some crafters and think, sure they can both make me a +3 sword, but I know that guy is good at it (and not just because he's left his '+3-sword-making skill' training for longer than everyone else). I want to play an artisan, not a factory worker (or even a factory manager), regardless of how complex the assembly line is.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are alternate ways of implementing enchanting. In the following I refer to the one who is placing the magic on the item as the "caster", and the one who physically forges/creates the item as the "crafter" - they can potentially be the same person. (Obviously this is not an exhaustive list.)
* One fairly common approach is to view the crafting of magic items as a separate field of magical study entirely, often called artificing, but that kind of devalues the standard crafter as they could only make "trash" (i.e. nonmagical items) which the artificer would use.
* You could place one enchantment on the blade, and another on the hilt, and then a further enchantment to bind them together successfully. Higher skills would allow the creation of more complex enchantments. This would directly implicate the caster at specific points during the crafting rather than simply making use of a finished product, but the caster and the crafter don't need any overlapping skills.
* Enchant the metal itself before forging it into something useful. This reverses the enchantment requirements: Magic-using types provide the base materials (enchanted metal) and crafters produce the final product.
* Something about the chosen crafting process itself imbues the enchantment (e.g. the mage-smith, dwarven rune-mason, etc). In other words, the crafter is the caster. Somewhat like the artificer mentioned above, but really this is simply a crafter who doesn't need a caster involved at all in the process to make magic items (but that doesn't mean they can cast spells like a caster). To me, personally, this is the most compelling form of crafting from the perspective of a player (because I find those archetypes fascinating). It also decouples the crafting of magic items from the spells that casters use, so that there doesn't need to be any kind of relation between what spells exist and what enchantments are possible.
I like all of those, and I think all three would be good to be implemented. Crafting, especially magical item crafting, shouldn't have the same process for every item. Wands with spells in them might require a caster to imbue the wand after it is created. A flaming broadsword might need certain runes and gems embedded during the creation process. A cloak of invisibility might require a special type of material that only a master crafter would know how to manipulate.
Lastly, truly powerful items such as artifacts might just require someone to be both a master at crafting and a master in casting magic. Or, at least a team effort throughout the entire crafting process.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno maybe, I am reading between the lines too much, but I've felt that the system is going to be something where a greatsword +3 of Giant slaying has a +3 from the skill of the crafter and the giant slaying from the skill of the enchanter.
That's how you empower the crafters and still need the enchanters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I like all of those, and I think all three would be good to be implemented.Crafting, especially magical item crafting, shouldn't have the same process for every item. Wands with spells in them might require a caster to imbue the wand after it is created. A flaming broadsword might need certain runes and gems embedded during the creation process. A cloak of invisibility might require a special type of material that only a master crafter would know how to manipulate.
Lastly, truly powerful items such as artifacts might just require someone to be both a master at crafting and a master in casting magic. Or, at least a team effort throughout the entire crafting process.
Good points, you can have multiple coexisting crafting methods, and for big projects some teamwork is sensible.
For stuff like wands that are essentially casters' tools and mimic a caster's ability it makes some sense for casters to be implicated heavily in their creation.
On the other hand, does a smith need to know a lot about swordfighting to craft a good sword? Certainly not, although theoretical knowledge of combat would definitely be useful in coming up with improvements as opposed to simply copying an existing design to perfection. Hmmmm....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No, but a smith does need to be strong, so I go back to hoping the crafting skills have choices to be made at char creation just like the combat skills do. If you are going to empower the crafter than the crafter also needs to have the same limitations.
That's also how you guarantee not having too many economy breaking uber crafters that don't need anything from anybody.
Btw, scrolls, are one crafting skill that does belong entrenched in the spell caster trees.