http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_the_Smith
Yes. This is the wiki that is your single source of evidence which clearly lies and gives one man credit for creating every legendary sword from every legendary culture.
You keep saying master craftsman is the issue but you continue to not provide any form of evidence to back your claim. This is what was happening in shallowsouls threads.
The issue is that you and ciretose have different design goals. You want magic item crafting to be more or less exclusively the domain of casters, ciretose wants martial characters to also have quite easy access to it.
There's no "evidence" to post because there can be no evidence that you'd accept. There's no point in you arguing "master craftsman has no issues because it should be hard as hell to be crafting for a non-caster", because one of the very premises of the thread is that that is an issue.
It's not that it isn't working as intended by the devs, it's that ciretoses (and many others) view of preferred design isn't the same as that of the devs. Hence, a discussion on house rules.
EDIT: And as another example of master smith creating magic or exceptional weapons (the lines are more blurry before modern times), look at the Forger of Swords from Mio, My Son that has forged a sword so sharp it can cut through stone and thus pierce the heart of Kato.
The long history of mundane crafters making magical materials is the one i'm having trouble finding, even in the wiki you provided.I would also add that there is a large history of forging magical materials (specifically parts of magical beasts/trees/etc/) into weapons by mundane crafters.
Again I havent ever seen this large history you speak of.
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_the_SmithYes. This is the wiki that is your single source of evidence which clearly lies and gives one man credit for creating every legendary sword from every legendary culture.
This is a source, yes. As I said, many if not most of the weapons were magical materials forged by mundane crafters.
Unless we are counting Gods as casters, there are less examples of non-divine magic users forging weapons than there are of magical materials being forged by mundane crafters.
I agree. My side of that discussion is that I rest on the laurels of my reading.
My reading so far is that mundane crafters dont make magic items.
I'm not saying thats how you have to do it. I'm saying thats how I do it and how I like it being done. Its expressly why I dont take mundane crafting magic items to be a good excuse for it to happen in game. Because it's not common or I havent seen it made to be common. I've just skimmed the surface and i've got 9 examples of unknown or clearly magical origin and one example of mundane that appears to be lying through its teeth.
In a forum about points of view, its my point of view.
|
|
Again I havent ever seen this large history you speak of.The long history of mundane crafters making magical materials is the one i'm having trouble finding, even in the wiki you provided.I would also add that there is a large history of forging magical materials (specifically parts of magical beasts/trees/etc/) into weapons by mundane crafters.
Are we looking at the same article? Of the ones with attribution of origin, most of them derive power from either being crafted by a God (or someone related to a God) or crafted from a material that is magical by it's nature.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
there are less examples of non-divine magic users forging weapons than there are of magical materials being forged by mundane crafters.
This is exactly the opposite of how i read both of the wikis you provided.
Every item that is labeled as 'unknown in origin' weiland steals credit for?Thats not proof.
And the muramasa and murasames are the other half of my argument which is that being a good basher and being a great smith are usually not tied together, so being a fighter who crafts becoming a fighter with magic level crafting is being musashi and muramasa all in one. But even then muramasa didnt make magical blades so you're still not talking about magical weaponcraft.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Forging special/magical materials into magical weapons seems to be more the domain of smiths than casters. While magic is involved (duh) storywise, their status as a smith is made far more important than their status as a caster.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fact that the legends attribute them to Wayland, a mundane crafter, isn't proof that it is a trope?
These swords didn't actually exist. The legend did. If the legend includes attribution to a mundane crafter on many, many, occasions....
And with all of the parsing of "Magic" vs "Non-magic" you are trying to narrow out the legendary swords as "not-magic" despite being clearly supernaturally powerful.
This is my frustration. I'm providing you with sources, and you are acting as if Wayland existed and stole credit for swords that existed.
He is the exact legendary mundane crafter you say didn't exist.
Not even going into the legendary swordmakers of Japan, or the fact that the grand-daddy of all European weapons myths in the Ulster Cycle was, as I said, made from a sea monster.
I'm saying the legend of how excalibur was crafted is that 'nobody knows'
The legend of how durandal was crafted is that nobody knows.
The legend of how the volund sword was crafted is actually well documented not to be him.
But one wiki writer or an agreement amongst 'magic weapon historians' is that any time the answer is we dont know, we'll just say weiland did it?
Not buying it.
|
|
I'm saying the legend of how excalibur was crafted is that 'nobody knows'
The legend of how durandal was crafted is that nobody knows.
The legend of how the volund sword was crafted is actually well documented not to be him.But one wiki writer or an agreement amongst 'magic weapon historians' is that any time the answer is we dont know, we'll just say weiland did it?
Not buying it.
Or maybe it is because of the numerous citations listed in the article.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing is, the further back you go the less clear the definition of "magic" and "mundane" is. When people actually believed in what we now consider the supernatural/magic, they didn't believe it was supernatural/magic, it was part of their world. Thus, it made no sense to label a weapon as "magically sharp" as there where no clear difference between that an "unusually sharp".
Crafting magic items is one of my favorite aspects of the game. And my friends with whom I first played thought so as well.
We played with only one feat "Craft Magic Item" with which you were free to make anything you wanted.
However you always need some limitation. In our game the limiting factor was always the materials needed. Special magic weapons/armor items needed special materials.
What it boiled down to was, when we killed something we tried to build magic items out of it.
We killed a magma worm, we made a shield from one of the scales.
We killed a spiked reptile thing. We made a club out of the spikes.
We found a broken Golem. We turned it into armor.
After building it the GM decided what magic the item would get. With a high roll on your craft check you could influence the results to your liking.
I realize that it requires a lot of trust between GM and players, but I found this version to be a lot of fun.
Well the further back you go the more you see that weiland is an aglosaxon creation stealing the myths of all predecessor cultures in the same way that christianity steals a lot of its holidays from original norse paganism, but hey. You create your beliefs in accordance with how you like things to go the same way I do mine.
|
|
Well the further back you go the more you see that weiland is an aglosaxon creation stealing the myths of all predecessor cultures in the same way that christianity steals a lot of its holidays from original norse paganism, but hey. You create your beliefs in accordance with how you like things to go the same way I do mine.
Because the legends are based on real things?
Put down the sour grapes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would if people werent insinuating my grapes are more sour than anyone elses in a forum called 'lets chat'
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would if people werent insinuating my grapes are more sour than anyone elses in a forum called 'lets chat'
The oldest weapon I can find (Beowulf's sword) was forged by giants (not generally thought of as magic users)
The Gae Bulga, grand daddy of all of the english language fantasy tales from the ulster cycle, forged from a sea monster.
If anything, the bastardization comes from the introduction of the mortal magic user, not the other way around.
Why does my brain think no? Here's why. Still doesnt mean i'm not willing to work with people but to say weiland made excalibur? Funny how none of the king arthur myths ever mentioned him. Weiland made durandal... Again why wasnt he mentioned?
I dont have to read wikilinks to know these stories. I took more years of french in highschool than you can officially take. I know my durandal. I love katanas more than anything else. I know my murasames. I know the viking stories better than i know the previous two because I was addicted to the svipdagsmal for like 2 solid years and was kinda bummed when the name svipdag was already taken on these boards as i've used it as my handle for at least 6 years before starting pathfinder... Cant always get what you want but I tell ya. I know legendary weapons pretty well and they inform my opinions on how crafting should work? Well thats how. I'll admit having a mundane anglo saxon take credit for norse steel and then english and french steel on top of that gets me a little extra punchy.
I dont cram it down anyones throat. Just happens to be convenient that the pathfinder system basically agrees with me that mundanes should have a much harder time making magic weapons than casters do. Doesnt stop me from trying to find a decent way to meet ya halfway if you're trying to make it work. But saying my logic isnt sound or my facts arent straight? Yeah. I don't take so well to it. Just stating my thought process on a forum about 'what feels right.'
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And the Arthurian Legends derive from...
Dude, you asked for sources, they have been provided and you are now saying "To hell with sources, I want my God Wizard Crafter because that is the trope!"
The legendary weapons were generally A) Made by a God or B) Made from Magical Materials.
If you want to get back to the real trope, we should get rid of the magic item rules entirely unless you are a god or you kill a specific magic creature/cut down a tree/etcc...but no one is calling for that.
Weapons and Armor aren't even embued with specific spells. The costs for the materials is included in the cost of making it, just open those up to everyone.
I think you both sound pretty inflamed. While I agree with ciretose's viewpoint, both of you seem to use pretty harsh language and ignoring each other's arguments.
By RAW, non caster can create magical arms and armor taking the Master Craftsman feat they can even add magical properties as flaming, vorpal, shock, etc. if they want by taking a +5 to DC for each spell prerequisite.
They can even create wondrous item, except that they won't be able to create any spell trigered or spell activated item.
Caster on the other hand, if the have the appropriate item creation feat can create or imbue magic into items.
Are caster better to imbue imagic into item that non caster? sure they are as they are better into casting spells than non caster.
But still there's way for non caster to cast some spells (i.e. anyone with use magic device, can cast spells from scroll or wand & staff, rogues with specific talent can have limited casting abilities) as there's way for non caster to create magical arms and armors as well as create wondrous item. But they are not just as effective to do so.
Now here's my RAI part
Where's the biggest difference between crafting magical arms and armor for non caster is that they have to craft the weapon or armor from scratch to get the bonus applied, as for caster they just need to buy a masterwork set of armor or a MW weapon to imbue it with magic. That doesn't mean that a caster can't spend some skill point into craft (armor) to craft a set of armor from scratch
Also, I would allow special material to replace some spell prerequisite for specific abilities (i.e: siccatite sky metal for flaming burst) and would allow a non caster to craft a keen weapon without spell prerequisite if he meets the appropriate caster lvl with the Master Craftsman feat.
Also, I would add a craft skill into the other item creation feat as I don't understand how a caster can craft a ring or a rod, if he don't have crafting skills for such item, unless the player agreed that is caster character only craft really ugly items
But as I said, this is my interpretation of the rules.
Remember, by RAW, non caster can craft magical arms and armor as in fantasy litterature and in legend, but they are not as effective to caster when it's time to imbue magic into the item. And it's fine this way as such crafter are legendary by themselves (20th level expert, with Master Craftsman feat and max out craft skills), not any commoner who can use an hammer and an anvil.*
Also, you may have your own interpretation and it's fine, as long as you don't try to impose it as a fact to the community.
*last sentence is a my view on non caster craftsman of legend and not a definitive fact ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We've been talking past each other for a good hour and a half. He sent out a the wiki and started talking about crafting magic weapons with magic components and weiland is the only source he's named as a mundane crafter having done so. He speaks to and hears nothing else. Making magic items out of magic things is a definitely supportable trope, but it's not what the thread is about. The thread is about mundane crafters, not what they use to craft.
So if the type of crafter is what we're talking about then we need mundane crafters making magic weapons. In a veritable smorgasbord wiki only one example weiland came up. That isnt 'a trope's worth of examples'.
So instead we swing to the other 'tropes worth of examples' and for me thats fighters who craft their own weapons, magical or not... As I pointed out Fighters arent crafters at all, and Crafters are not fighters. Musashi, Thor, Odin, King arthur. Not one of them used weapons they made themselves. Great fighters to be sure. Not crafters. Great crafters? Volund! Murasame! The elves and dwarves who made Lævateinn and Mjolnir! Amazing crafters that have no representation in myth or history as being able to fight worth a lick. Those 4 examples cover both historical and mythological. Not good enough for you? Ok. Uh... Inu Yasha... Voltron... Knight rider... the Bride from Kill Bill. Inigo Montoya.
So why do casters craft and fighters don't? Clearly. If the only ones who craft are the ones who can't kick a$$, that sounds like the casters. If all the best fighters in history mythology, cheap 80's action flicks, and anime dont craft... Why should you?
These are how I judge if fighters should be magic crafters... They shouldnt be crafters at all. And the pathfinder rules make mundane crafting so ludicrously hard that it seems trivial to argue that any player should waste time or skills or feats with mundane crafting. Despite working very hard to come up with some semblance of making it work that isnt overpowered and giving away freebies, he's basically ignored me for 90 minutes and punchlined with 'I want my God Wizard Crafter' which hasnt been my argument at all.
The argument that Weiland made excalibur is trivial to the previous two points because the facts supporting the weiland article arent there. Follow these wiki links and refernces cited. Nowhere in the volundsaga is there the saga of volund making caliburn. He never makes it, never tosses it in a lake, never stabs it into a stone. Its just not there. There are tons of very educated people who have tried combining the norse, saxon, teutonic, germanic and christian myths into one cohesive story. And it all sounds very legitimate and everything seems to line up fine until you get to the end. Eric the Red is Jesus. I'm not kidding. Let it sink in a little. The people who believe that Weiland was an anglo saxon man who made durandal and excalibur and the grendel sword instead of believing he was an elf named Volund who did no such thing also believe that Eric the Red is Jesus. I'm not kidding. I have dug into this stuff for years.
I made a pretty good effort to build an idea that came pretty close to getting him what he wants. An idea that seems pretty generous while still being pretty fair. But since it doesnt line up with his idea that he's pretty much decided is the right answer then anything else is the wrong idea and so my ideas are nazi hitler stomp-you-down elitist? I thought this was a lets discuss ideas thread but it turns out its a 'listen to how awesome only my idea is' thread.
It seems he doesnt care about my point of view and I dont care about his. The rest is just semantics. Sorry pathfinder makes your non caster's crafting life so difficult. Takeda out.
|
|
I think you both sound pretty inflamed. While I agree with ciretose's viewpoint, both of you seem to use pretty harsh language and ignoring each other's arguments.
I will agree with the language, but I'm tired of chasing ever moving goalposts.
Cite a source...ok.
Not good enough...ok, cite more sources which show the orgins of most magic items was "made by god" or "crafted from magic materials" as opposed to "Imbued by a mortal magic user"
Still not good enough...well then I have to assume nothing is going to be good enough, so have a nice day.
You say there is are no warriors who use weapons they craft and then int he same post cite the Dwarves, who, hello, made the weapons they used in battle.
The idea you build was based on a magic item. Which, hello, we are in agreement them crafting magic items should actually be removed from the martial trope as it is a bad aspect of Master Craftsmen.
You are acting like I am saying it should be a class feature. They should have access to a feat that casters have access to, and they should be able to substitute skill for caster levels for items like weapons and armor which have no spell requirements to start with.
Let me say that again.
Which have no spell requirements to start with.
And for the record, I am not ignoring his arguments, I am refuting them.
And what is frustrating is he actually agrees with the outcome, he just wants to put it in an unattainable by non-caster box for some reason i can't fathom.
As far as Fabricate, that requires a Craft skill check and since the spell is instantaneous, it's not going to be a check that you can take 10 or 20 on.
Take 20, no. But unless you're trying to use it in combat, there's no reason you can't take 10.
And it only requires a craft check for masterwork items, so between that and Masterwork Transformation, no craft check is needed. And wizards can autopass masterwork craft checks by putting one measly skill point into the relevant craft skill anyhow.
|
|
Magic items that require spells, yes.
Magic items that don't...somewhat but not that much easier.
If you make craft Magic Arms and Armor an open feat where caster levels can be replaced with skill ranks, the one using skill ranks is still disadvantaged by needing the skill ranks.
But there are no spells involved. With the exception of "Special" Armor and Weapons, spells aren't added. Something about the creation makes them "Magic"
It could be the materials, it could be the process, but it isn't a specific spell.
So make it the materials or the process, do the above that seems the right balance to me.
EDIT: This is to LazarX by the way, I got ninjaed by the wall. I think we largely agree.
|
|
@Khrysaor - Two separate arguments. Not that hard to understand. They were even under separate numbers to make that clear.
Craft Magic Items is too broad in my opinion. I also think there is a case for dividing magic arms and magic armor into two separate feats. If you are going to have things like "Craft Ring" and "Craft Potion" as separate feats, then in my opinion "Craft Magic Items" is too broad.
Aside and completely separate from that argument about that topic, as to the evidence that it takes more...umm...Because two feats is more than one feat? And then because taking skills for options you get for free with caster levels...I mean, seriously...you keep bringing up the modifier like it matters at all when you can take 10 and it only applies to a specific skill.
The two arguments are as related as a Discussion comparing an Egg McMuffin or A Hot Fudge Sunday. While they are both in the category of food, they are otherwise unrelated.
I know you are frustrated, the best way to relieve your frustration is to leave the thread.
You're right. 2 feats is more than 1. You win the internets. Except the second feat provides mechanical benefit that casters don't get.
So martials' "advantage" is that they are required to take a terrible version of Skill Focus at the cost of waiting much longer and drastically limiting what they can craft? (Also masterwork tools exist for every skill so that part is just straight up a lie.)
How do casters get Spellcraft for free?
Because they wanted it anyhow - hell, spellbook-users are required to invest in it if they ever want more than two spells per level. But nobody already wants Craft for things other than crafting because that's all Craft does.
6 of 11 caster classes get 2+int skills per level. Over 50%. One of those skills should be Spellcraft, if they want to be a magic item crafter. It can also be used for some utility purposes that dont help them get more money. Fighter and gunslinger are the only 2 non casters that have 2+int skills. 2 of 8, or 25%. Seems like it's not as much of a strain on the non caster for skills, as it is for the caster.
Let me get this straight: you're seriously arguing that wizards, witches, magi, and summoners get no more skill points than fighters?
You are not arguing in good faith here.
Mundane crafting has a higher return than magic crafting.
That would be true if they worked at the same pace. Magic crafting makes 1000gp of progress (2000gp with a tiny bit of effort) per day; mundane crafting struggles to make 30gp of progress per week.
You can make a mundane item for 1/3 the market value and then sell it at a profit for 1/2 market value. Sure it's a minor profit of 1/6 the market value, but it is a profit. Magic crafting lets you make items for 1/2 cost and sell them for 1/2 cost. In many cases you purchase the item to be enchanted and now you're out that much money when you sell it for a net loss. There is no profit.
If you're doing mundane crafting for profit, you need to be consistently hitting a 31 on your Craft checks (and do so against a DC of 30 or more) before you start making more than an equivalent Profession check would. It's disingenuous to present the profit as anything but negligible to anyone crafting normally - except for a wizard using Fabricate, who can make a decent profit (e.g. 1750gp per casting if used to make mithral fullplate).
Meanwhile, a caster with the Hedge Magician trait using accelerated magic item crafting for profit makes a net gain of 50gp per day (350gp per week). That may not sound like much, but hitting the same profit with Craft requires an average Craft check of 145 against a DC 145 item. And that's assuming you can even find a DC 145 item - if you're making a standard DC 20 item, using accelerated crafting to bump the DC to 30, then your average Craft check needs to be a whopping 700. (For reference, getting even near a 145 is impossible.)
See, the reason nobody's convinced by the modifiers you're posting is that none of them are actually true in any meaningful sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry for going completely meta, but I think this might help the thread anyway:
Maybe there needs to be a rephrasing of goals of the thread, because I don't see anything good coming out of this. Please correct me if anything in this post is a flawed assumption on other's motives on my side.
That's why, generally, I think it's a good idea to include in the opening post of a house rule discussion thread of an issue that you feel certain about, the following things:
- Percieved issues with the current rules
- How the OP want the game to flow (ie the ideal situation after the house rules).
- A message saying either "if you don't agree, this isn't the thread for you" or "if you don't agree, sum it up in one post, I'll consider it, but I don't want to debate this".
- Ideas for what can and can't work in terms of house rules or approaches.
I really think such things are needed. This thread was created by ciretose and, unless I misunderstood them, for the purpose of discussing how the crafting rules could be remade to better fit his view of how the game world should work. See point 2 and 3 of the OP.
Instead of actually discussing what rules changes would and would not improve the percieved issue mentioned in 2, we are thrown into a debate about if 2 is an issue or not. It is my feeling that that isn't what the threads purpose was.
If the thread had instead stated something like:
"I don't like wizards/casters being the primary magic item creators regardless of type. I think one who wields weapons would be best at knowing how to improve them, even with magic, and I want to change the rules to better fit that. If you think casters should be the primary crafters/the only PC's that would find it worth their time and feats to craft, this isn't the thread for that. If you agree that warriors should be better at enchanting than they are, if they choose to invest in it, what do you think about these rules:"
I think a lot of the discussion afterwards would have been much more constructive.
Oh, and one more thing: Saying things like "casters should be best at this because of *magic*" or "this metal would be easier to bend with magic than at a smithy" or anything else that relies on how magic works. This isn't really a strong argument, regardless of what you opinion on this matter is or whatever matter it is. Because the thing with magic is that it's by nature arbitrary. Pathfinder doesn't have a strict set of rules about how magic works - rather, it's very much on a case by case basis, especially how easy something is.
Doing something with magic can be just how easy or how hard you as rules designer want. That's part of what makes magic such a good deus ex machina - you don't have to relate it to the real world.
|
|
@Khrysaor - I am unsure how many other ways I can disprove your assertion aside from math.
Does it cost more feats? Yes.
Does it cost more skill points? Yes, as casters only ever have to invest in one skill, Spellcraft, while non-casters need to invest in multiple skills to reach the same effect. Less actually, because they have a higher DC.
And already pointed out, if a class has Int as it's primary...yeah...extra skill points. Oh, and what skills are intelligence based again? Yup.
So that takes out the wizard, the Magi, the summoner and the witch, as they get bonuses not only to spellcraft from Int, but any crafting they take as well.
So we have the Cleric and the Druid, who by the way have access to all of the spell on their spell list, and the Paladin who would actually benefit from the change.
Compared to your rogue with masterwork tools...
And let us again go back to Master Craftsman and this little line.
"You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item."
Now look under item creation. Each and every one has a specific skill or profession attached. Some have two options, but they all have one listed.
And you can only choose one.
Are we done yet?
@Trogdar - You making a whole new set of skills makes Rogues the crafter class and complicates skills. Look at a character sheet and fill up all the blanks with various crafting options.
If you split the feats, you can reach the same goal.
If you don't like the theme of the discussion, you don't have to stick around. You can create your own thread.
I was thinking of hiding this topic from the beginning, however...
I'm willing to divide up Misc. magic items, as long as you allow multiple crafters for all items. One person to make the scroll and ink, another to write the spell on the scroll. You do not need to know any spell to make vellum. It's sheep hide tanned as light as possible.
In Ring of the Nuberling, a dwarf(non wizard) took magical gold, and crafted a magic ring. He failed some check and it became cursed.
|
|
@Trogdar - You making a whole new set of skills makes Rogues the crafter class and complicates skills. Look at a character sheet and fill up all the blanks with various crafting options.
If you split the feats, you can reach the same goal.
If you don't like the theme of the discussion, you don't have to stick around. You can create your own thread.
I was thinking of hiding this topic from the beginning, however...
I'm willing to divide up Misc. magic items, as long as you allow multiple crafters for all items. One person to make the scroll and ink, another to write the spell on the scroll. You do not need to know any spell to make vellum. It's sheep hide tanned as light as possible.
I wouldn't go that extreme. It would be more Craft Magic Items would be divided into Item (No slot) and Clothing (slot) or something like that.
This was one of the things I was hoping to hash out in the discussion, where the lines would be if you broke up the feat.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Your interpretation is wrong. You can use ANY craft or profession skill as the feat dictates."
Master Craftsman
Your superior crafting skills allow you to create simple magic items.
Prerequisites: 5 ranks in any Craft or Profession skill.
Benefit: Choose one Craft or Profession skill in which you possess at least 5 ranks. You receive a +2 bonus on your chosen Craft or Profession skill. Ranks in your chosen skill count as your caster level for the purposes of qualifying for the Craft Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item feats. You can create magic items using these feats, substituting your ranks in the chosen skill for your total caster level. 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 (see the magic item creation rules in Magic Items). You cannot use this feat to create any spell-trigger or spell-activation item.
Normal: Only spellcasters can qualify for the Craft Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item feats.
Creating Magic Armor
Skill Used in Creation: Spellcraft or Craft (armor).
Creating Magic Weapons
Skill Used in Creation: Spellcraft, Craft (bows) (for magic bows and arrows), or Craft (weapons) (for all other weapons).
What part of this is unclear?
Creating Wondrous Items
Skill Used In Creation: Spellcraft or an applicable Craft or Profession skill check.
Meaning it is up to GM discretion what is or isn't applicable for a given item.
There is no confusion on Armor or weapons as to which skills apply.
Are you done yet? The rest of us are having an interesting conversation.