Crafting TPK


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

OK, even though temporarily resolved in game, we had this situation come up during our last session. One of the PCs has a Crafting character, with wonderous item feat, and is a 5th level oracle. The discussion became violent. It revolves around rules interpretation, the "unofficial" FAQ response, and how things are made. The rules seem to suggest that to create a wonderous item (within the parameters, including non-charged spells, etc) you can bypass the base requirements for creating the item other than the feat by simply adding the +5 modifier for each thing you lack. On one hand, it specifically calls for the spells to be present at the time of creation, yet the FAQ says this isnt so.

FAQ response:
Crafting and Bypassing Requirements: What crafting requirements can you bypass by adding +5 to the DC of your Spellcraft check?
As presented on page 549 of the Core Rulebook, there are no limitations other than (1) you have to have the item creation feat, and (2) you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites. So racial requirements, specific spell requirements, math requirements (such as "caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus"), and so on, are all subject to the +5 DC rule.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 02/22/13

The players take on it is that he can make any item, without the requisite spell, as long as he adds the +5 modifier for its lack. So, he could theoretically create an item with a Bard spell requirement, with no bard spell present or cast into the item. Thus, the FAQ covers "specific spell requirements" under that proviso. The players take on it is, he provides the mojo via his spellcraft and innate magical prowess. The rest of the room thought this was a lot munchkin.

My question is, is this working as intended? Does Paizo intend free creation and proliferation of items, and how does this affect the use of the item afterwards as far as activation? Do you go to the root spell or the creator's class as far as use?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, it's working as intended and your player is correct. Item creation is not intended to be difficult.

Creating an item by eschewing spell requirements does not change how the final item functions in any way.

I'm curious why you and your group take issue with this- it's spelled out pretty explicitly in the magic item creation rules.


Actually, its contradictory thus the FAQ response to it, and since we have been playing similar games since inception, ala 1980 1st edition, this is a changeover that isn't obvious from how its presented or written in the rules.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It is working as intended.

I also think it is kind of wonky because basically the crafter is able to emulate spells that are unfamiliar with a flat DC. I find it weird that crafting something without using a level 1 spell that the crafter can cast increases the difficulty of crafting by the same amount as "faking" a 9th level spell that isn't on their spell list and that they may not have ever seen before. One of my house rules is that the DC for crafting without a spell scales with spell level and how unfamiliar the spell should be to the character (whether it is on the class spell list, divine vs. arcane), rather than just being a flat +5.

Liberty's Edge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the big advantages of this rule is that it helps spontaneous casting classes, which always lagged behind in crafting power, some more power in crafting. It still doesn't make them as good as the prepared classes for crafting, but it helps.

That said, if a discussion amongst friends, about a game turns violent, maybe you all shouldn't be playing that game.


The other part of the brawl was that via this method, you could also create a new "spell effect" in this sideways method, embed it in an item, and bypass any ties to a spell class or character class as long as you can describe it. Looks like my Helmet of Darth Vaderness is on the way!
Masterwork Helmet + wonderous item feat + (5) Vaderness (can only be destroyed by my own son/voice mod/mind flay) = DC 10? I take 10 on that.

We were totally unprepared for the scrap, it was an emotional moment after the PC playing this character for several weeks lost his mind.


Would something like a necklace of fireballs be considered a spell trigger item?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You can normally bypass a spell prerequisite for crafting an item by adding 5 to the DC. The FAQ is simply saying you cannot do this for potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion items. You can still do this for other items.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lakesidefantasy wrote:
Would something like a necklace of fireballs be considered a spell trigger item?

No, that's definitely a use-activated item. Examples of spell trigger items are wands and staves.


Heimdall666 wrote:

The other part of the brawl was that via this method, you could also create a new "spell effect" in this sideways method, embed it in an item, and bypass any ties to a spell class or character class as long as you can describe it. Looks like my Helmet of Darth Vaderness is on the way!

Masterwork Helmet + wonderous item feat + (5) Vaderness (can only be destroyed by my own son/voice mod/mind flay) = DC 10? I take 10 on that.

All custom magic items and effects are explicitly under the control of the GM. Obviously no GM would approve that item.


Are wands and staves the only spell trigger items? I thought some wondrous items fell into that category.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The "rules" for custom magic items are vague guidelines for the GM, for ballpark prices/difficulties, not "rights" that the players can make claims to.

As for making a magic item emulating a high-level spell: the item does have to meet the minimum caster level to cast that spell, in addition to everything else. That may not sound like much, but for a non-wizard, Intelligence isn't quite as high and the spellcraft DC isn't quite as easy to meet. Emulating one missing spell is doable, but two missing spells is often too hard. (I've researched this thoroughly because my druid got a sudden huge spike in wealth.)

But you have to realize that the main limits to item crafting are monetary and crafting feats. Not the spellcraft DC. Feats are really valuable, so it'll be a big sacrifice to take multiple crafting feats. If you can afford to craft something, you can probably meet the DC, but affording it in the first place is the difficult part.

Liberty's Edge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Lakesidefantasy wrote:
Are wands and staves the only spell trigger items? I thought some wondrous items fell into that category.

Wondrous items, sadly, are a catch all category. Some wondrous item can be spell trigger items, but if that happen is explicitly stated in the item description. A "real" spell trigger item has a lower cost than a wondrous item that cast a spell.

- * -

@Heinmdall666
Yes, you can make an item that mimic the effect of a spell that you can't cast, but pricing custom magic items is something that the GM do.
"Helmet of Darth Vaderness": what it do.
"Infinite DR puls infinite energy resistance unless the attacker is my son."
"Ok, similar to a item that give DR/- and rings of energy resistance, lets price that ,,,
ring of energy resistance fire, greater is 44.000, add the resistance to the other 3 elements, without using slots, 66.000 each, multiply for infinite/30, we get 242.000*infinite/30, I get infinite as a final value.
No need to check the DR cost, you need a infinite sum of money to make it and an infinite period of time.
But cheer, the DC to make it is only 16, like for the ring."


Diego Rossi wrote:

. . . multiply for infinite/30, we get 242.000*infinite/30, I get infinite as a final value.

No need to check the DR cost, you need a infinite sum of money to make it and an infinite period of time.
But cheer, the DC to make it is only 16, like for the ring.

First I loled, then I loled more. Thanks for the best thing I've seen all day.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Diego Rossi wrote:


@Heinmdall666
Yes, you can make an item that mimic the effect of a spell that you can't cast, but pricing custom magic items is something that the GM do.
"Helmet of Darth Vaderness": what it do.
"Infinite DR puls infinite energy resistance unless the attacker is my son."

I would have described this as DR 30/Luke Skywalker, although arguably he also has DR 20/Ben Kenobi.


Heimdall666 wrote:

Looks like my Helmet of Darth Vaderness is on the way!

Masterwork Helmet + wonderous item feat + (5) Vaderness (can only be destroyed by my own son/voice mod/mind flay) = DC 10? I take 10 on that.

Did you watch the same movies I did?

Can only be destroyed by my Sith master, can only be redeemed by my son.


The point wasn't to house rule the offender, it was to understand the rules as written. We all had an instant Go Get Stuffed response to the crafter. He was breaking several conventions many DMs reserve, such as supervision of the final product, how raw materials and costs were derived, etc, it wasn't a simple thing.

Funny stuff Diego. (Jim Carey) "So youre saying, I got a chance?"

All of the players at the table are experienced GMs and we all had an immediate allergic reaction to this rule, which we all mentally added to our ongoing list of "stuff not to do in my game".

I argue that Vader was killed by his son's unwillingness to accept a new employer. The Empire employment separation process was a bit "extreme", considering they had immediate withdrawal of health benefits, including prosthesis, via electroshock sith medicine.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Referring to the player as "the offender" makes it seem like maybe he'd be better off if you did just make a house rule rather than making him a criminal for following the FAQ. Maybe you could admit to him that he was correct about the FAQ ruling but tell him that you all hate what the FAQ says and want it to work a different way.

If you go that route then offering him a chance to swap out feats or rebuild the PC if desired might be nice.

Sovereign Court

From the perspective of a sorcerer, it's actually quite cute that you can craft items to do the things you can't do with spells. Doing it "the hard way", with the "crutch" of really really really fancy "focus items".


Can you provide examples of what the player wanted to do and what specifically the other players took exception to?


It sounds to me like you were bringing past edition expectations into the game. RAW and FAQ the character was right and unless theDM has a specific houserule "the offender" was in the right and the GM and jury were overreacting.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

And on that note it might be a good idea to let your table in on the fact that in pathfinder... Might want to sit down for this...

Barbarians can read... I know. I know. The vertigo will pass. Its a brave new world.

Not liking the rules and not knowing the rules are two separate things, and not liking crafting is one of the worst things you can spring on a guy who's got a strong understanding of the rules and a character built to use them. Thats why your player lost his mind. He knows the crafting rules very well, and he's faced with a table that doesn't seem to have a clear understanding of the rules and more importantly, doesn't seem to care if he's right. Hating magic item crafting so much you want it not to be in your system at all is VERY common for some pathfinder gms.

You've been given a chance to examine crafting more closely now, so thats good. Shame it got this far along before your table had a chance to get to know those rules before having their special controvercial brand of cool/uncool thrust upon you.

Magic item crafting is one of my personal hottest topics and I staunchly defend the crafters right to do it as long as he's following the rules. PFOS on the other hand doesnt use crafting at all, so there's a huge pathfinder playerbase that feels like crafting was poorly written or it's a horrible idea/ruins balance/breaks wbl/creates drama/is only used by powergaming munchkins, etc etc... and shouldnt be used, so if your table decides they don't want to use it, they're in good company... As a fan of magic item crafting I'd say its a shame, but every table decides how they're gonna go on such things, and there are plenty of tables who've gone the 'no no no. lets not do that' route on magic item crafting.

I also feel sorry for the guy. He knows what he's doing and it looks like he's at a table where his version of fun blows the rest of the table's mind. It sounds like his magic item craftin days might be numbered.

I adamantly agree that 'custom magic items' are totally the gms call, but if this guy was only trying to make things that have been published, RAW it's possible, and arguably easy.

PM Aelryinth if you need help with the bazillion 'in game' ways a gm can make it too difficult to even attempt. Like requiring the player to research/pay for the research/be forced to find as treasure the recipe for the item he's trying to make... Never giving him enough downtime to be able to safely, securely, quietly craft... He'd most likely be more than happy to help you shut down another magic item creation character.

I think that would be a shame, but nobody can tell you how to run things at your own table.

The one big word i'd highlight from your post is the +5dc bonus to bypass each prerequisite that he doesnt meet adds +5dc... so if he's trying to make a belt of physical perfection but has no bulls strength or bears endurance, thats not +5 once. It's +5 for each thing he's missing... Thats an important nuance that people who are new to crafting can mess up... If he were trying to use a single +5dc to bypass all of the requisites together then, no. Thats not right.

If on the other hand he's trying to make a ring of wishes or a luckblade by using the +5dc in place of the wish spell and the 25000gp diamond spell component, I'm going to have a harder time feeling sympathy for him. This is maybe one of the grayest areas of crafting that a sneaky player will try to sneak by you... This doesnt sound like the case because if all he has is 'wondrous items' then he cant make blades or rings.... So you're probably safe there for now. The common ruling on these are that the wishes from luckblades and rings are 'spell trigger/spell completion' effects, so they do require the spell and the components.


Heimdall666 wrote:

OK, even though temporarily resolved in game, we had this situation come up during our last session. One of the PCs has a Crafting character, with wonderous item feat, and is a 5th level oracle. The discussion became violent. It revolves around rules interpretation, the "unofficial" FAQ response, and how things are made. The rules seem to suggest that to create a wonderous item (within the parameters, including non-charged spells, etc) you can bypass the base requirements for creating the item other than the feat by simply adding the +5 modifier for each thing you lack. On one hand, it specifically calls for the spells to be present at the time of creation, yet the FAQ says this isnt so.

FAQ response:
Crafting and Bypassing Requirements: What crafting requirements can you bypass by adding +5 to the DC of your Spellcraft check?
As presented on page 549 of the Core Rulebook, there are no limitations other than (1) you have to have the item creation feat, and (2) you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites. So racial requirements, specific spell requirements, math requirements (such as "caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus"), and so on, are all subject to the +5 DC rule.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 02/22/13

The players take on it is that he can make any item, without the requisite spell, as long as he adds the +5 modifier for its lack. So, he could theoretically create an item with a Bard spell requirement, with no bard spell present or cast into the item. Thus, the FAQ covers "specific spell requirements" under that proviso. The players take on it is, he provides the mojo via his spellcraft and innate magical prowess. The rest of the room thought this was a lot munchkin.

My question is, is this working as intended? Does Paizo intend free creation and proliferation of items, and how does this affect the use of the item afterwards as far as activation? Do you go to the root spell or the creator's class as...

He has it exactly right. I don't see how there could be any room to interpret the rules otherwise. The rules as written are very clear on this in the CRB.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The biggest reason it is DC 5 +5 for every req skipped: giving a chance for martial characters that take master craftsman a chance to actually make something. A 5th level fighter probably only has +10 bonus to craft, and cant make any pre-req that requires spell casting, ever. Think of all the iconic non-spell casting dwarves that have made things. Also, some of the DC's you'll come across later are quite high, and non int spell casters might have trouble finishing things.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

One thing that doesn't come immediately across for most people reading the crafting rules is this. You ALWAYS want to be taking 10. Not taking 10 gives you a chance to create a cursed item, and then become that cursed item's first victim.

So then when you go back to looking at those DCs, note that not having prereqs starts to push those DCs high for people who aren't hardcore crafters. Having the spell you need or whatever other prereq required removes this danger of creating a cursed item. So there is that.

Also as mentioned above, the real counter to overzealous crafting is gold pieces and time. Don't have'm? Can't craft.

Project Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Removed a number of inappropriate posts.


Remember also that for wondrous items, you can pick which crafting skill to use or use spellcraft.

I think I established that my arcane trickster can make items that use spells from other classes, and caster levels higher than hers, using the accelerated crafting rules, and she can't fail even if she rolls rather than taking 10 and rolls a 1.


Can you lay that out in greater detail? Like what spells, what caster level, and what your skills were?


While I certainly agree that it's ridiculous the DC only increases by 5 to not cast the spell —or rather that an item can be created at all without casting the spell— overall I don't think it's actually a big deal, since gold is really the limiting factor. They couldn't really make anything too strong or otherwise it would be out of their budget.

I found that the biggest issue to deal with was rather whether or not X character would know of X item they wanted to craft, or even X item that they wanted to buy.
It all seems so meta-gamey when players are having their characters craft/buy everything that's perfectly suitable for their situation as if all those items in existence were common-knowledge.

As far as I know there's no real way to deal with this slight issue though, aside from DM just overruling certain obviously strange requests (like maybe crafting a poison that only exists in a certain area they're no where near)


@Joesi : That's why Magic Items were in the DM book in 3.5. It was for the DM's eyes, not the players'.


Ok, first of all, this was not me or my character. I was an interested neutral supporter of the Crafter. I believe in the creativity of magic items as a player and GM. Many of the posters here are passing judgement on the "obvious" rules, which are not "obvious" at all. They are contradictory in the Core Rulebooks, and only by review of the FAQ as a last minute reprieve for the Crafter did we find the question answered. Some GMs rule that if its not printed material, errata and internet forum "suggestions" are irrelevant. All of the players are experienced GMs and players AND RULES LAYWERS. We have no problem generating house rules to solve our problems.
That said, this is exactly what the PC did.
He constructed, using tools we had taken off dead creatures as loot(250gp value diamond tipped picks), raw materials (metal)into the form of a necklace, bracelet, or other item empowered with a permanent Endure Elements effect, so that we could as a party survive a constant 130 degree heat area. He made one for each player. I supplied the Endure Elements spell as a wizard. His "cost" in raw materials was the sacrifice of the tools during the construction process to cover the costs. This is all perfectly legit, albeit a bit sketchy as his loot to gp value conversion tactic bypassed traditional "magical supplies" required to make the items, and he was working in a less than perfect workshop. I'm not sure what he used for a target number, but thats a pretty basic item, im sure not more than a DC 20, I think he took 10 plus his spellcraft to get it done.
The issue came up with the "any criteria can be bypassed with a +5 modifier" ruling. The other players took exception because this wasn't specifically spelled out in the Core Rulebook, and their primary objection was that a Crafter shouldn't be able to create an item he cannot provide the prerequisite spells for, either with a friend, item, scroll, or other source(As stated in the CRB). So, if the Crafter didnt have Endure Elements available at all, he could GET IT simply by adding 5 to his DC(As corrected in the FAQ). The same could be said of Wish, Permanency, etc.. as long as you had the cash to cover the cost for the base item.
As a GM it simply requires economic control over your players, which I pointed out to the cheapskate GMs at the table.

To my second point, if a vanilla item is created, does it have a tie to a similar spell or the Crafting creators class for use? So my Endure Elements would be wizard CL7, but the item creator is oracle 5. If multiple effects are cast, do we track each caster level on each addition, or assume the minimum CL on all even though that may not be true? Simplicity would dictate One CL to rule them all.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Heimdall666 wrote:

The other part of the brawl was that via this method, you could also create a new "spell effect" in this sideways method, embed it in an item, and bypass any ties to a spell class or character class as long as you can describe it. Looks like my Helmet of Darth Vaderness is on the way!

Masterwork Helmet + wonderous item feat + (5) Vaderness (can only be destroyed by my own son/voice mod/mind flay) = DC 10? I take 10 on that.

We were totally unprepared for the scrap, it was an emotional moment after the PC playing this character for several weeks lost his mind.

This is a major reason why I added a formula requirement to crafting. It's the ultimate gatekeeper in restraining creativity where it threatens to destroy campaign balance.


There isn't a written rule as far as I know for adjudicating multiple CLs on an item. In theory separate effects (which also usually double the cost) could have different CLs.

Item CLs are also kinda funky. They function as being part of DC of crafting an item as well as a measure of how hard the item is to dispel. For non-spell required items (not potions, wands, scrolls), the CL is not a hard requirement and can be bypassed with the +5 DC. Thus a pearl of power (1st level) could be crafted by a 3rd level wizard even though its CL is 17 (though at some considerable risk of it being cursed, DC 27 and all).

The FAQ and the CRB rules are somewhat contradictory, but that is likely because of unfortunate editing. There was at one point two different DCs for crafting items, for a small amount of time, IIRC (DC+5, and DC +10) so its possible that old language from 3.5 slipped in there or some other writer or editor missed something, but the FAQ is the final official ruling on the issue.

In any case, yes, your crafter friend can take +5 to DC and not need your spellcasting to make his items, and that might seem wrong to long time players. But it sounds like you guys were making minor magic items, which are not difficult. If he wants to make a holy avenger though, he might find that much more difficult/impossible, let alone expensive.


Heimdall666 wrote:
To my second point, if a vanilla item is created, does it have a tie to a similar spell or the Crafting creators class for use? So my Endure Elements would be wizard CL7, but the item creator is oracle 5. If multiple effects are cast, do we track each caster level on each addition, or assume the minimum CL on all even though that may not be true? Simplicity would dictate One CL to rule them all.

From the CRB:

While item creation costs are handled in detail below, note that normally the two primary factors are the caster level of the creator and the level of the spell or spells put into the item. A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell. Using metamagic feats, a caster can place spells in items at a higher level than normal.

Why does this matter?

Let's go to the Item Creation chart for the item your friend made, say, a bracelet of Endure Elements.

This item takes up a slot and is a continuous spell, so the line in the chart we use is:

Use-activated or continuous Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp

So the first thing we see is that, with a first level spell, the formula basically breaks down to 2,000 x caster level. Creating it at CL 1 makes the cost 2,000 gp, but creating it at CL 7 makes the cost 14,000 gp. That's a big difference.

Looking at the Endure Elements spell, there is really very little benefit to a higher caster level. If you wear the item into an antimagic field, or get hit with a dispel magic, etc., a higher caster level might make it harder for the magic to be suppressed. Is that worth the higher cost? Probably not.

So just make them at CL 1 and save a small fortune.

However, for some spells, say, Fireball, higher caster level means higher damage. Other spells have other benefits for higher caster level, like duration, or better effects. Those can be taken on a case-by-case basis to decide what CL to use when crafting the item, bearing in mind that it usually drives up the cost and the crafting time and it drives up the Spellcraft check at the end of the process.

So these bracelets each cost 2,000 gp and take two days to craft, or 8 days if he's crafting them while adventuring. The DC would be 6. Not having the spell would make it DC 11. Since he can Take-10 and probably has at least one point of Spellcraft, this is automatic.

As a DM, I wouldn't be all that accepting of "I sacrifice diamond tipped picks to make a bracelet". Instead, I would require that he had a bracelet or he would need to make one (crafting skill, and I would expect it to be a masterwork bracelet).


DM_Blake wrote:
Heimdall666 wrote:
To my second point, if a vanilla item is created, does it have a tie to a similar spell or the Crafting creators class for use? So my Endure Elements would be wizard CL7, but the item creator is oracle 5. If multiple effects are cast, do we track each caster level on each addition, or assume the minimum CL on all even though that may not be true? Simplicity would dictate One CL to rule them all.

From the CRB:

While item creation costs are handled in detail below, note that normally the two primary factors are the caster level of the creator and the level of the spell or spells put into the item. A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell. Using metamagic feats, a caster can place spells in items at a higher level than normal.

Why does this matter?

Let's go to the Item Creation chart for the item your friend made, say, a bracelet of Endure Elements.

This item takes up a slot and is a continuous spell, so the line in the chart we use is:

Use-activated or continuous Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp

So the first thing we see is that, with a first level spell, the formula basically breaks down to 2,000 x caster level. Creating it at CL 1 makes the cost 2,000 gp, but creating it at CL 7 makes the cost 14,000 gp. That's a big difference.

Looking at the Endure Elements spell, there is really very little benefit to a higher caster level. If you wear the item into an antimagic field, or get hit with a dispel magic, etc., a higher caster level might make it harder for the magic to be suppressed. Is that worth the higher cost? Probably not.

So just make them at CL 1 and save a small fortune.

However, for some spells, say, Fireball, higher caster level means higher damage. Other spells have other benefits for higher caster level, like duration, or better effects. Those can be taken on a case-by-case basis to decide what CL to use when crafting the item,...

You forgot a line for your example :

Quote:
2 If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.

So, in your example, Endure element will cost 1000gp.

In the blinking ring case, it costs 27000 gp with a CL of 5, not 7 (that's a mistake in the official description). And in order to make it "continuous" effect, it would cost 120000gp (3 [spell leve] x 5 [min CL] x 2000 [continuous] x 4 [duration in rounds] = 120000)


Heimdall666 wrote:
The issue came up with the "any criteria can be bypassed with a +5 modifier" ruling. The other players took exception because this wasn't specifically spelled out in the Core Rulebook, and their primary objection was that a Crafter shouldn't be able to create an item he cannot provide the prerequisite spells for, either with a friend, item, scroll, or other source(As stated in the CRB).

This is in the CRB.

"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."


Pathfinder Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Heimdall666 wrote:

Ok, first of all, this was not me or my character. I was an interested neutral supporter of the Crafter. I believe in the creativity of magic items as a player and GM. Many of the posters here are passing judgement on the "obvious" rules, which are not "obvious" at all. They are contradictory in the Core Rulebooks, and only by review of the FAQ as a last minute reprieve for the Crafter did we find the question answered. Some GMs rule that if its not printed material, errata and internet forum "suggestions" are irrelevant. All of the players are experienced GMs and players AND RULES LAYWERS. We have no problem generating house rules to solve our problems.

Not sure if maybe you have an old printing or something, but in my Core Rule book (page 549 under "Magic Item Creation" it says

Quote:

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 spelltrigger
and spell-completion magic items without meeting
their spell prerequisites.

Without looking at any FAQ, my group hasn't had any problems figuring out what they can and can't make using the crafting rules.

Any "standard" item is straight forward... My 6th level Magus can make a Headband of INT and a Belt of STR. The DC for the Headband is 5 higher than the Belt, because I don't know "Fox's Cunning", but I do know "Bull's Strength".

Custom made items are all up to the DM, so what is "required" is up to him. Any requirement I don't meet, I need to add +5 to the DC. Could be pretty easy to make, could be really hard. At the end of the day, the DM decides how hard/easy and how much it costs (which determines time it takes to make and how much I have to spend)

EDIT: Ninja'd! Damn work getting in the way of posting quickly!!! :)


Avh wrote:

You forgot a line for your example :

Quote:
2 If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.
So, in your example, Endure element will cost 1000gp.

Thanks, I knew that rule was in there somewhere and was looking for it to get the exact multiplier right, but couldn't find it (didn't think to check the footnotes in the chart) so I omitted it. Got busy on a conference call and stopped looking. Lazy of me.


DM_Blake wrote:
Avh wrote:

You forgot a line for your example :

Quote:
2 If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.
So, in your example, Endure element will cost 1000gp.

Thanks, I knew that rule was in there somewhere and was looking for it to get the exact multiplier right, but couldn't find it (didn't think to check the footnotes in the chart) so I omitted it. Got busy on a conference call and stopped looking. Lazy of me.

I forget where it is all the time too ^^


Heimdall666: In addition to identifying the balance point in magic-item creation - party wealth and the nebulous "magical supplies"/materials - another house rule you and your fellow DMs may wish to consider is one derived from Shadowrun (SR), i.e., "foci" limits with or without "foci addiction". As you may not be familiar with that system, I'll explain.

In SR 4th Ed, a magician is limited in the number and total power of foci (magic items) they can use. IIRC, it's a function of Intelligence and Magic, an attribute that doesn't directly correlate to PF. How I have personally adapted this to my RoTR campaign is to institute a rule that a character cannot use any item with a caster level greater than their character level + CHAMf and the total caster levels of all permanent, non-charged, non-intelligent items may not exceed (LVL+1)*(CHA+1).

(This - at least in theory - quashes players like myself that purchase 6-12 cracked ioun stones as soon as I can get my munchkinny hands on them).

YMMV.


Any reason why you tied it directly to CHA? You trying to boost sorc/paly?


The use of the picks was to "sacrifice" the cost of the picks as part of the construction cost, the Crafter destroyed them in "pounding the magic into the" necklace/bracelet. Funny, the crafter came up with a cost to create of 500gp on the endure element item, will have to check the math on it.

We have experience in many game systems and item creation, Shadowrun, Earthdawn (the best really), etc, Pathfinder is one of the few so far that is actually supportive of a crafter class. Earthdawn allows you to imbue your items as you adventure making them singular to you, which I think is a really great way to roleplay and use magic items.

I am not sure of our rules printing Canthin, but we had books and PRFD20 open to reference the sections, they seemed inconsistent, other than the reference to the FAQ SPECIFICALLY in regard to the section stating "spell requirements" in the FAQ, this isnt in the Core.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Heimdall666 wrote:
Funny, the crafter came up with a cost to create of 500gp on the endure element item, will have to check the math on it.

If the market price of the item is 1000 gp, then the cost to create it would be 500 gp.


Anburaid wrote:
Can you lay that out in greater detail? Like what spells, what caster level, and what your skills were?

Character is level 11: 3 rog, 4 wiz, 4 arcane trickster. Total int is 24, for a +7. Spellcraft is a class skill, for another +3. 11 ranks, giving spellcraft 21.

Decanter of endless water is CL 9, prerequisite spell Control Water. DC to create is 14. If you don't have Control Water (which is a 6th level spell for a wizard), it's +5. If you can't do caster level 9, it's +5. If you want to accelerate, that's another +5. So that's a total target of 29.

The character has a valet familiar, which provides an unconditional +2 modifier to craft and spellcraft checks to create an item. On a natural 1, that would give a spellcraft result of 24. But the character also knows Crafter's Fortune, and can have a +5 on the roll, which yields a 29.

So that's someone at caster level 8 (but character level 11) able to make a 29 on a natural 1, without anything super fancy. No skill focus, for instance. The valet familiar is a pretty noticeable buff, but ultimately it's only a +2, and skill focus would be a +3, and a crafted item that gave +5 or +10 to skill checks could be used, and the bard could always Inspire Competence...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Basically put:

Be cool, let him craft, as the rules allow, or let him rebuild.

No need for torches and pitchforks.

Sczarni

odd in this scenario it's an oracle lol, so lvl 10 with say a 14 int, he's really going to need some other things to really get them "high" dcs reliably.

Liberty's Edge

seebs wrote:
Decanter of endless water is CL 9, prerequisite spell Control Water. DC to create is 14. If you don't have Control Water (which is a 6th level spell for a wizard), it's +5. If you can't do caster level 9, it's +5. If you want to accelerate, that's another +5. So that's a total target of 29.

Actually, that's wrong. The CL 9 is not a prerequisite, and is not listed on the requirement line of the item description. You can create a Decanter of Endless Water at any CL of 7 or greater (the minimum caster level required to cast the requisite spell Control Water). The listed CL 9 is only an example of a ready-made Decanter of Endless Water, and it could be higher or lower.

Here's the relevant text:

Core Rulebook p.549 wrote:
A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell.

1 to 50 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Crafting TPK All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.