becasue your not forging you are enchanting at that point. the Item has to already beforged and master work qaulity before you can use craft magic item feats. At least for weapons and armor, all other items can be normal items that are already crafted through mudane crafting. Forging happens during the mundane proccess, not the magic item proccess.Master Craftsman specifically calls out that you must choose a specific profession or craft, substituting your ranks in that craft for your caster level and using its check in place of spellcraft. It does not require that you actually have a craft chosen that would normally be associated with the item you want to build.It goes back to applying common sense to the rules.
Why would you think you could apply Craft: basketweaving to forging a sword? Are you also going to argue the Dead condition does not stop a character from acting normally? There are a lot of things not explicitly included in the rules, and any attempt to include everything would result in a book too large to carry.
I believe the concept behind the Master Craftsman feat, though, is that even though you don't have a grasp on controlling the arcane magicks at work to create a magic weapon, you are so competent at the craft of forging and improving a weapon, that you can make it recieve magic through the grace of your workmanship. That, really, is the only explanation that would allow a non spellcaster to enchant anything, and with that explanation in mind, it explains pretty much every part of the feat.
It explains why it is limited to enchanted mundane objects, and not overt spell trigger or spell completion items.It explains the requirement to use your craft check to complete the work, as you are not manipulating the magic directly via your mastership of the arcane forces (spellcraft), but instead are working your craft in such a way that the item receives the arcane energies somewhat naturally.
It also explains why you are limited to only doing this with your chosen craft, and items associated with that craft, as, being able to craft a sword in such a fine degree that it takes on magical properties does not mean you could do the same with a cloak.
Now, with this explanation of the feat, I do also feel that you should be able to take multiple iterations of it, and tie it in with another skill. I see no reason why, if you HAVE the skills for it, you wouldn't be able to have the same impact on armor. In all honesty, I'm not sure in my home game I'd even require a separate taking of the feat, I'd just expand it so that any skill that has sufficient ranks would qualify for its use.
From a game design perspective, I really don't see why they even created the Item Creation feats, other than just as a feat tax, and a way to limit it to spellcasters except in this extreme case. I feel it should, instead, have always been handled via the associated skills involved. The way to limit it primarily to spellcasters at that point, would be to alter the DC calculation to be based not just on +5 for not having the CL required, but to be a modifier based on how far below the DC you are (+2 per caster level missing would be my proposal). Doing it based on the skill alone would be far more acceptable in my mind. There are already other feats that could be used to optimize the crafting process, but not be necessarily required.
Thank you; you just justified the use of the skill working for all magic items in your own statement. It is the skill of improving the item that taps in to magical energy’s making the item magical. Does not have the be limited to the weapon craft only for swords, as I stated earlier in my examples or others have stated for using basket weaver making a magical dagger or a cheese merchant that slices cheese with a sword every day. The crafting of the basket and placing dagger in to said basket praying to the gods. Enchanted the bladed because of his skill it impresses the god to enchant it as gift. Or maybe the swords pommel or hilt is made entirely of basket weave. Instead of tang being wraped in leather or cloth or a metal with jewel placed in it. look I just justfied why a jeweler should be able to make a magical sword. It is up to you to come up with the fluff to justify this crazy illogical roll. logic should not be applied to a world where any person can be come 7ft tall, can shoot fireballs from eyes and bolts of lighting out his rear end.
I believe the concept behind the Master Craftsman feat, though, is that even though you don't have a grasp on controlling the arcane magicks at work to create a magic weapon, you are so competent at the craft of forging and improving a weapon, that you can make it recieve magic through the grace of your workmanship. That, really, is the only explanation that would allow a non spellcaster to enchant anything, and with that explanation in mind, it explains pretty much every part of the feat.
It explains why it is limited to enchanted mundane objects, and not overt spell trigger or spell completion items.
It explains the requirement to use your craft check to complete the work, as you are not manipulating the magic directly via your mastership of the arcane forces (spellcraft), but instead are working your craft in such a way that the item receives the arcane energies...
You've convinced me, you're completely beyond logic on this matter. If you agree that the magic is getting in there by the great skill of the person able to improve the items, then how in the WORLD do you equate that to high skill in on craft being able to improve a completely unrelated item? The fantastical logical leaps you make are insane, and should disqualify you from any sort of discussion in a rules forum.
"I'm really good at making swords. I can make them perfectly balanced, I can align the metal just right so that it accepts magical energies from the ether around me... therefore I can do the same to the fibers in a cloak..." This makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever.
I could almost understand some of the others here who were saying they could use any skill to enhance an item when they were basing it on poor grammar comprehension, thereby making it just the result of an unfortunate RAW peculiarity. But to actually try to justify it like you are is just asinine. Your GM must love having you at the table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You've convinced me, you're completely beyond logic on this matter. If you agree that the magic is getting in there by the great skill of the person able to improve the items, then how in the WORLD do you equate that to high skill in on craft being able to improve a completely unrelated item? The fantastical logical leaps you make are insane, and should disqualify you from any sort of discussion in a rules forum.
"I'm really good at making swords. I can make them perfectly balanced, I can align the metal just right so that it accepts magical energies from the ether around me... therefore I can do the same to the fibers in a cloak..." This makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever.
I could almost understand some of the others here who were saying they could use any skill to enhance an item when they were basing it on poor grammar comprehension, thereby making it just the result of an unfortunate RAW peculiarity. But to actually try to justify it like you are is just asinine. Your GM must love having you at the table.
Considering I am the GM at the table I would think he is loved at the table. I know the Players love the GM as they constantly buy APs for me to run. They also have fun and come up with creative things.
why does it make no sense that a weapon smith could not make a magical cloak, as part of the process of magic a magic sword it to polish it correct? Maybe the way the weapon smith polish all the magic swords he makes or comes into his shop for repairs. align the energy on that that peace of cloth in return the cloth gain that magical energy also.
The ability to align the energy in the cloth is represented by having craft wondrous item feat. What skill was used is based off master craftsmen meaning the item was used some where in that crafting process. or as i stated before crafting magic item does not necessarily mean you physical making something, that is what mundane crafting does.
It could also be represent in a divine way by pray to your god...
If it's all the same, regardless of what magic we're using, where the magic is coming from, or what item it's going into, then why does it even matter if there are feats and skills involved? What makes one character different than another, and why do we bother even having skills, feats, traits, and classes?
For the game-time involved, there is virtually no other activity that is as gold economic as enchanting a magical item. Before any abilities that increase crafting speed, or acceleration via increased DC, it, in essence, creates 500GP of wealth per day. By comparison, any other per day activity aside from adventuring generates on the order of 5-15gp per day. The trade off is that it is really only feasible by a percentage of the characters in a campaign, and there are limits to the number, in most cases, of items that can be used at a given time. That use limitation, compared with an extensive skill and feat tax is what keeps things balanced.The feat we're discussing is 'master craftsman', not 'guy who got lucky enchanting a sword and the gods like what he does, so he ended up with enchanted cloth too'. You're of course, as the GM, able to fiat what you describe all you want, but it certainly doesn't belong in a discussion about the written rules, and how they should be interpreted. (Even though it's clear to me, in this case, that there is little to no interpretation required, as it is all quite clear, and explained so by me already in this thread). The feat works as designed, if you simply follow the words used to make it up properly. It is not overpowered, it does not create a situation where non spellcasters are overpowering casters in their magic creating capabilities (as Khrysaor is trying to rule it as). yes, it is obvious there are those who don't understand rule-speak, and unfortunately, the same parties have created enough threads of the last 3-4 years that their wrong interpretation has created a sort of bias towards it in the community, but that doesn't make that interpretation correct. It would be nice to have the devs clarify it, but if they have to step in and clarify one rule that is clearly written and misunderstood, they'd have to do so with a LOT more in this game. The FAQ pages would grow to be longer than the core rulebook, as the level of grammatical misunderstanding knows no bounds.
And to get upset at me stating this is a grammatical competence issue is pointless. This whole misunderstanding comes down to how a single word in interpreted in the feat. The word MUST, in any context where discussing choice or rules, is restrictive in it's core nature. This is opposed by the word CAN, which is permissive in its nature.
People taking offense at another person putting them down and you have the audacity to tell them not to get upset at your insults? Perhaps spend more time reading the forum rules with all your mighty grammar skills. No where in them does it condone the use of personal attacks. Focus on the rules or don't post.
So I'm a little late to the party, but I wanted to throw my opinion out there since magic crafting is something near and dear to my heart. I can see the stance of either position, but my stance is that it should let you pick any craft or profession skill and that it will work for any magic item you create. There are two major reasons behind my stance:
First, I think that the feat is otherwise mechanically extremely weak. A +2 to a craft or profession skill and the ability to take a feat that you won't even be able to fully utilize after taking it? That's pretty bad. Letting any craft or profession to essentially work as Spellcraft for a non-caster for these two feats, after they are selected later, sounds much more in line with the power of a feat. Without access to spells, the feat is restrictive enough as it is.
Second, I just think it's much for flavorful that way. There was a thread about this feat a while ago in which someone wrote an example of how someone with Profession (Hairdresser) and Master Craftsman could make magical armor.
I would like to see someone cook a magic carpet. The result wouldn't be nice.
I actually see Profession (Cook) as one of the easiest skills to rationalize for Master Craftsman. You cook up a set of amazing magical stews, stirring the item within it, layer upon layer, until the magic takes. A cloth wondrous item would be especially easy to make with this process.
Okay, so, couple of questions:
1. Do you think that spellcasters should also be allowed to use any craft, not just the listed or applicable crafts, when making magic items?
Naturally? No. They already have Spellcraft for that. If they take the Master Craftsman feat, though, yes, they can.
3. If you don't think spellcasters should also be allowed to do that, why would you let anyone else do it without explicit wording saying the rules for item crafting were being changed?
I would let anyone do it (including spellcasters if they really want to) because they took a feat and it's a total crap feat if the one selected skill cannot be used for any magic item crafting.
But hey, this is just my opinion in the end. And I think the lack of FAQ, errata, or any other explicit official ruling from the developers is evidence that they want this to stay in the realm of GM ruling (besides, you typically have to work with your GM if you plan to do magic item crafting in a campaign). Since magic crafting feats aren't allowed in PFS, an official ruling probably isn't a high priority anyway.