After a great deal of thought, I've decided to make Master Craftsman more useable, and hopefully see it taken for once. The goal is to change it from a feat tax into an actual feat.
The change I'm implementing is: requirements changed to 5 ranks of craft (blacksmithing), or craft (weaponsmithing), or craft (armorsmithing), craft (leatherworking), or craft (boywer). Benefit changed to: Select either weapons or armor, you gain a +2 bonus to craft rolls to create that type of item. Additionally, you can craft magical properties into the type of item selected as though you possessed the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat, using an an appropriate craft skill in place of Spellcraft. When doing so, your effective caster level is equal to the ranks you have in the craft skill used. This feat may be taken a second time, in which case it applies to weapons if armor was chosen first, or armor if weapons were chosen first.
Has anyone tried a similar simplification in their games?
(Note, I'm not concerned if someone doesn't like the idea of non-casters crafting magic gear. That's expressly what I'm going for here.)
I don't think you'll find your change overpowered. In fact, I think you should grant the ability to enchant both weapons and armor since Craft Magic Arms & Armor isn't the most attractive feat to begin with. You could still require the PC to use a skill appropriate to the item being made.
I also think it would be a shame to eliminate the ability to craft Wondrous Items. The default small town I start PCs out in has a half-orc NPC named Gobar who is a drunk and tardy tailor with terrible fashion sense but the ability to sew magic into his garments. Gobar's Cargo Pants act as the side pockets of a Handy Haversack while helping to answer the question of why PCs bother to wear pants since there's no "pants" magic item slot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
TBH I think a better idea (and MUCH simpler) is letting anyone with ranks in the appropriate Craft skill take the Item Crafting Feats.
Then Master Craftsman removes the -5 penalty for not knowing the spell (or not having the proper caster level? Or both?).
Whether you take Craft Magic Arms & Armor directly or have Master Craftsman subsume its function doesn't seem very significant to me. I guess either one could work. The idea of a gruff dwarf who forges great weapons seems iconic to me. I guess a martial arts master who forges his or her own weapon does too.
I'm not sure if many folks would take Master Craftsman just to avoid the +5 DC for not supplying a spell. You could probably get a buddy to supply the spell in a lot of cases, and even if you can't the increased DC is rarely a challenge (at least it hasn't been for my casters who took Craft feats and didn't know the prereq spells for the items they were making). I guess that folks might sign up for something like a +3 increase in their effective caster level so that they could produce weapons and armor with a higher "plus" than usual for their level.
+1 to Rynjin's suggestion of allowing the feat to craft more than just weapons and armor. For flavor reasons, still requiring an appropriate Craft or Profession skill but keep the details simple.
Whether you take Craft Magic Arms & Armor directly or have Master Craftsman subsume its function doesn't seem very significant to me. I guess either one could work. The idea of a gruff dwarf who forges great weapons seems iconic to me. I guess a martial arts master who forges his or her own weapon does too.
I'm not sure if many folks would take Master Craftsman just to avoid the +5 DC for not supplying a spell. You could probably get a buddy to supply the spell in a lot of cases, and even if you can't the increased DC is rarely a challenge (at least it hasn't been for my casters who took Craft feats and didn't know the prereq spells for the items they were making). I guess that folks might sign up for something like a +3 increase in their effective caster level so that they could produce weapons and armor with a higher "plus" than usual for their level.
Maybe, but the whole point is being able to craft stuff on your own. And those -5 penalties add up quick.
Not a 3rd level caster? -5 to make that magic sword.
Want to make it Keen and Flaming? Eat another -10 because you don't know Keen Edge, Flame Blade, Flamestrike, or Fireball.
You get the idea.
If you can succeed at a UMD check, you can provide the spell components with a scroll. Also, a spellcaster can assist you with the crafting (possibly providing an Aid Another boost as well).
Also, you can still make a Keen Flaming sword with only the -5 for missing a single spell. You just do each enchantment individually, and you only need to provide a single spell at a time.
My recommendation is to alter Master Craftsman as follows:
Your superior crafting skills allow you to create simple magic items.
Prerequisite: 5 Ranks in any Craft or Profession Skill
Benefit: You can create magic items as if you possessed the appropriate Item Creation feat. You must have at least as many ranks in an appropriate Craft or Profession skill as the Caster Level of the item being created, and this Caster Level requirement cannot be bypassed by increasing the DC of the check. You must use this Craft or Profession skill (not Spellcraft) for the crafting checks, and this feat cannot be used to create Spell Completion or Spell Trigger items. This crafting takes 1 day for each 1,000gp in the item's base price.
Normal: Only spellcasters can qualify for Item Creation feats.
Rynjin, I appreciate the "for all" impulse your idea implies, but I prefer the idea of it being a bit more special than that.
I could see combining/allowing both weapons and armor, I just worry that might be a bit much. As for removing the wondrous items option, I feel like wondrous item covers way too many items. I would probably allow it if there was great enough interest though. Especially since I'm also planning to add a system to replace generic + number items.
Rynjin, I appreciate the "for all" impulse your idea implies, but I prefer the idea of it being a bit more special than that.
I could see combining/allowing both weapons and armor, I just worry that might be a bit much. As for removing the wondrous items option, I feel like wondrous item covers way too many items. I would probably allow it if there was great enough interest though. Especially since I'm also planning to add a system to replace generic + number items.
The thing to keep in mind, is that with this, while yes, the Craft Wondrous Item feat may cover a lot of items, only a small subset of those items might be craftable under a given Craft skill. Craft (jewelry) might be the highest number of items, with mostly rings, amulets, and headbands. In my write-up of the revised feat, I limited the items further by caster level, which I feel keeps things well in line. With my numbers, assuming an acceptable INT score, masterwork tools, and class skill bonus, you can skip 2 spells and still take 10 on any item within your caster level range. 3 spell items or 2 spell and rushed jobs would start to put limits on it further, but that's still going to burn a lot of skill ranks if one is going to try to be too flexible across different disciplines.
The thing to keep in mind, is that with this, while yes, the Craft Wondrous Item feat may cover a lot of items, only a small subset of those items might be craftable under a given Craft skill. Craft (jewelry) might be the highest number of items, with mostly rings, amulets, and headbands. In my write-up of the revised feat, I limited the items further by caster level, which I feel keeps things well in line. With my numbers, assuming an acceptable INT score, masterwork tools, and class skill bonus, you can skip 2 spells and still take 10 on any item within your caster level range. 3 spell items or 2 spell and rushed jobs would start to put limits on it further, but that's still going to burn a lot of skill ranks if one is going to try to be too flexible across different disciplines.Rynjin, I appreciate the "for all" impulse your idea implies, but I prefer the idea of it being a bit more special than that.
I could see combining/allowing both weapons and armor, I just worry that might be a bit much. As for removing the wondrous items option, I feel like wondrous item covers way too many items. I would probably allow it if there was great enough interest though. Especially since I'm also planning to add a system to replace generic + number items.
Rings are a separate feat. Also, with the generic +number items replaced, headbands and amulets aren't that useful.
I'd suspect that craft (tailor) would provide the biggest benefit, encompassing nearly any clothing type item.
If you read my revision of the feat, you'll see that it is all items, not specifically weapons, wondrous or rings. (in fact, the lack of the ability to Craft rings under Master Craftsman was one of the reasons for revising the feat).
Craft (clothing) gets cloaks, robes, hats, etc.
Craft (leather) would get belts, bags, etc.
Craft (jewelry) would get headbands, rings, amulets, etc.
Craft (weapons) would get.. weapons..
Craft (armor) would get armor and shields
Craft (bows) would get bows, crossbows, and ammunition
and so on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you should just change the existing crafting feats to remove the caster level requirement and let people use their mundane skills as ranks in spellcraft.
I think you should just change the existing crafting feats to remove the caster level requirement and let people use their mundane skills as ranks in spellcraft.
I do feel that spellcasters SHOULD have an easier job of pushing magical powers into mundane objects. That is why spellcraft can be used as a universal skill for enchanting magic items, and why in my revision of Master Craftsman, it prohibits using spellcraft for the crafting. Mundane crafters can also make an item so fine and exquisite, and with so much willpower, that they too can enchant the item, but it is an expression of the craftsmanship (Craft skill), not a result of direct magical manipulation (Spellcraft).
Also, I can't tell exactly what you mean with your post, but there has never been a requirement to have even a single rank in Spellcraft to enchant any magic item.
I do feel that spellcasters SHOULD have an easier job of pushing magical powers into mundane objects. That is why spellcraft can be used as a universal skill for enchanting magic items, and why in my revision of Master Craftsman, it prohibits using spellcraft for the crafting. Mundane crafters can also make an item so fine and exquisite, and with so much willpower, that they too can enchant the item, but it is an expression of the craftsmanship (Craft skill), not a result of direct magical manipulation (Spellcraft).
Also, I can't tell exactly what you mean with your post, but there has never been a requirement to have even a single rank in Spellcraft to enchant any magic item.
Huh, so you are right about the spellcraft...
I meant that you would change the requirements of say Craft Wondrous Items to:
prerequisites: Caster level 3rd or 3 ranks is a craft skill.
special: You can not use spellcraft to craft wondrous items unless your caster level is 3 or more.
This way, mundanes already have a harder time because they need a bajillion craft skills. Though you are not making one feat that can be used to craft every item.
Craft Wondrous Items allows you to make a nice variety of items, but finding the downtime to make more than a few expensive items can be tough in many games. WBL inflation and increased magic item availability are issues which exist whether the crafter is a caster or non-caster though.
A lot of people feel that martial classes are often weaker and less versatile than casters. I'm not as worried about that imbalance as some folks, but I do feel that if a martial character spends a feat slot to be able to craft items that's actually a more significant investment than if a caster spends that same feat slot. It isn't like these martial characters would be making caster themed or specific items like wands or staffs, and even Paizo, supposedly great oppressors of the martials, allow them to buy into Craft Wondrous Items for two feats. I don't think that lowering the entry cost to one feat would break anything or steal anybody's thunder.
@Rynjin - Is the limit of 1/3 caster level for the enhancement bonus on crafted weapons and armor not a hard limit? If not that makes Craft Magic A&A more appealing in general.
No, the only hard requirement is the feat, and the spells for spell completion and spell trigger items, caster level can be bypassed for +5 to the DC.
I like where you're going with it, but I hate the change to the prerequisites.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like where you're going with it, but I hate the change to the prerequisites.
For mine? The feat already requires 5 in craft, I just specified it to types of craft that would actually be useable. I'm open to other types of craft, so long as they're useable to make weapons or armor. Craft (scrimshaw) would be fine, although extremely limiting. Craft (cooking) wouldn't really work though.
I like where you're going with it, but I hate the change to the prerequisites.For mine? The feat already requires 5 in craft, I just specified it to types of craft that would actually be useable. I'm open to other types of craft, so long as they're useable to make weapons or armor. Craft (scrimshaw) would be fine, although extremely limiting. Craft (cooking) wouldn't really work though.
Is there a Craft (cooking) in the rulebook? I see references to Profession (cook), which actually is used in making at least one magic item, the Book of Marvelous Recipes.
Is there a Craft (cooking) in the rulebook? I see references to Profession (cook), which actually is used in making at least one magic item, the Book of Marvelous Recipes.I like where you're going with it, but I hate the change to the prerequisites.For mine? The feat already requires 5 in craft, I just specified it to types of craft that would actually be useable. I'm open to other types of craft, so long as they're useable to make weapons or armor. Craft (scrimshaw) would be fine, although extremely limiting. Craft (cooking) wouldn't really work though.
I remember a thread earlier this year discussing if it was properly a craft or profession. The main issue with it being a profession is that professions are generally jobs you know how to do, while craft is things you know how to make.
In any case, I used that in order to avoid the board favourite "useless" craft, basketweaving.
...but there has never been a requirement to have even a single rank in Spellcraft to enchant any magic item.
Well... you're required to have a single rank in Spellcraft for making any magic item, if you're making it with Spellcraft. After all, a tad hard to roll a trained-only skill with no ranks!
Though, more seriously, there are actually certain magical items that do have ranks in Spellcraft as a requirement, just as some items have ranks in other skills as requirements (say, a ring of jumping). These items (the Spellcraft ones) are pretty few and far between admittedly, but certainly not impossible to see in future material.
Of course, there's always the rules for ignoring such requirements.
I'd like to see the PC have and use a Craft skill relevant to the item being made, but I think it makes sense to allow multiple skills to be used with the feat. Spellcasters can already use multiple different Craft skills to make items with Craft Wondrous Items. They just rarely bother since it is easier to consolidate their ranks in Spellcraft.
Creating a magic weapon has a special prerequisite: The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the weapon.
I guess the groups I play with always took that at face value as something which you need. If it is just another requirement which can be bypassed for +5 DC that's interesting though it won't help me in the only game where I'm currently crafting since the DM has some house rules involving special materials and secret crafting methods which will limit me to +3 for now anyhow (and require exotic ingredients for anything other than a basic "plus")
Master Craftsman
Your superior crafting skills allow you to create 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.
You can use your ranks in an associated Craft or Profession skill as your caster level for the purpose of qualifying for item creation feats, even if you have no caster level. For example, you can use your ranks in Craft (weapons) or Craft (armor) to qualify for the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat, Craft (alchemy) for the Brew Potion feat, Craft (jewelry) for the Forge Ring feat, or Profession (scribe) for the Scribe Scroll feat. You can create magic items using these feats, substituting your ranks in the associated skill for your total caster level. You must use the associated 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).
Normal: Only spellcasters can qualify for item creation feats.
I like the idea of making the feat allow you to craft anything you have the ranks in the right craft for. It kind of makes up for the fact that mundanes tend to need more feats for their basic competency.
...but there has never been a requirement to have even a single rank in Spellcraft to enchant any magic item.Well... you're required to have a single rank in Spellcraft for making any magic item, if you're making it with Spellcraft. After all, a tad hard to roll a trained-only skill with no ranks!
Though, more seriously, there are actually certain magical items that do have ranks in Spellcraft as a requirement, just as some items have ranks in other skills as requirements (say, a ring of jumping). These items (the Spellcraft ones) are pretty few and far between admittedly, but certainly not impossible to see in future material.
Of course, there's always the rules for ignoring such requirements.
The point was, that Craft is the 'primary' skill for making items. Spellcraft is technically the alternative skill, but since most spellcasters usually max out spellcraft anyway, it's all anyone ever uses. I've personally never liked that, but it's how Wotc wrote it, and so that's how it stays. I personally would have loved to see a -5 penalty to using spellcraft for it, to offset it's one-skill-fits-all benefit - but that's not something that's ever going to change in this edition.
At least unchained background skills helps to bring some attention to craft skills. And there is SOME benefit to using craft skills instead of spellcraft, as there ARE quite a few more ways to boost a craft skill than there are to boost Spellcraft.
@Trogdar - I'd probably still make you choose Wondrous Items or Arms & Armor. Normally the Wondrous Item crafting feat seems a lot better, but crafting Arms & Armor might be more appealing to martial characters who expect to rely heavily on those items than it is to a Wizard who is likely to not use them at all. I guess that another option might be to allow you to use a certain number of Craft skills with the feat though I prefer the idea of a dwarven smith who forges weapons and armor to that of an elven rogue who is a magical tailor as well as crafting rapiers. I suppose that's just a matter of taste though. I think that two associated skills, three associted skills, or even 1 associated skill per 3 or 5 levels would be better than just 1 associated skill though.
You know, the last major crafter I had was a Soul Forger (Magus). Thematically, I would have much preferred to take the Master Craftsman feat, as modified above (my revision) than Craft Magic Arms and Armor, even though I had a decent enough caster level. This character was a craftsman, not an enchanter - he actually created every item he used after 2nd level, as well as much of the arms and armor for the rest of the party.
I personally allow my players to craft items without item creation feats. Nearly all of players I've encountered that take item creation feats do so for either flavor or for having the convenience of upgrading weapons and gear. I don't think players should lose a feat or two for either of those reasons.
You want to make master craftsman better, but then you remove the ability for it to craft wondrous items/rings? Why? Wondrous items are already limited by the broad scope of craft skills necessary to cover the feat, and rings aren't that good anyway. What's wrong with a jeweler who can craft a ring or amulet so magnificently that it becomes magical?
If the intention of the homebrew is to improve the feat, don't sidegrade it instead, just improve it.
Better yet, why not just remove it entirely and allow crafting feats to use a craft skill as a prereq? Much simpler, and simpler is almost always better in design.
As an aside, having used this feat in a game, I can tell you that the negative modifiers are actually a really serious issue. Expecting an arcane caster to be around to supply spells is highly optimistic -- and also somewhat defeats the purpose (if we had a wizard, he would have just taken the feats).
I personally allow my players to craft items without item creation feats. Nearly all of players I've encountered that take item creation feats do so for either flavor or for having the convenience of upgrading weapons and gear. I don't think players should lose a feat or two for either of those reasons.
I fully understand the reason for the feat tax on crafting magical items, and have no problem with it. The ability to 'purchase' magical items for half cost is a power boost likely far more than a single feat would be. Even if you are selling loot to make your items, meaning it's no actual coin savings, you are in essence converting a found, maybe not optimal item, to exactly the item you need - which again, is a power boost. The fact that this crafting feat can improve the rest of the party as well makes it even more powerful.