"You are trained in the use of talismans and similar magical paraphernalia. This training might have occurred in a formal classroom or been an agglomeration of folk magic picked up over time. You can craft talismans and know the formulas for all common talismans in the Core Rulebook of your level or lower. You remember talisman formulas and don't need a formula book for them.
Additionally, you carry a collection of magical baubles you can turn into temporary talismans. Each day during your daily preparations, you can make two talismans with an item level no higher than half your level. You must know each talisman's formula. A talisman created this way is a temporary item and loses its magic the next time you make your daily preparations if you haven't already used it."
The dabbler has the formulas for free, but to make a standard talisman they would have to have Magical Crafting and follow the standard magical crafting rules?
Or does the "You can craft talismans" give you the ability to make them with no ranks in crafting? Do you till follow the rules for time and cost?
Thanks.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
I would think "you can craft talismans" means you don't need to be trained in Crafting or to have Magical Crafting.
Other then that, I don't see any reason you wouldn't follow the normal Craft rules.
Though it is not made explicit, my reading of this archetype is that it is supposed to operate similarly to an Alchemists Infused Reagents, or more accurately the Herbalists version of advanced alchemy.
Those characters need access to the formulas (which Talisman Dabbler covers) but otherwise don't need to roll to craft using said reagents. These characters treat these reagents more like spell slots that they can prepare and use for "temporary items" at the start of the day than they treat them like normal crafted items.
Ergo the time it takes to make these "temporary items" is rolled into the daily preparations, and they don't need to roll for these "fake" items" like they would during a normal 4-day crafting session.
I understand the temporary items, I'm talking about "permanent talismans", ones you make and can hold onto indefinitely. As seen here: https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?Category=15&Subcategory=19
It says you can, so you can.
That said, I think this needs an errata to have trained in crafting as a prerequisite.
Donald wrote: I understand the temporary items, I'm talking about "permanent talismans", ones you make and can hold onto indefinitely. As seen here: https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?Category=15&Subcategory=19
Sorry I misunderstood. I agree with MaxAstro, including that you would otherwise follow the rest of the normal rules and requirements for crafting other types of items.
Mellored wrote: It says you can, so you can.
That said, I think this needs an errata to have trained in crafting as a prerequisite.
I think it might be intentional that it doesn't. There is value within the archetype whether you have crafting or not due to the free items, and the ability to craft normal permanent ones at a low level with an untrained craft skill would still be allowed (though of limited usefulness).
But I could see how someone at high level and untrained in craft might be a bit confused when they go to make a permanent version of the same thing they've been making daily for free and it's nigh impossible for them.
i think that you wouldn't need the Magical crafting feat, but for permanent items since the only rules about "how" you craft them are in the Craft skill, you'd still follow that rules.
so basically, for permanent stuff i would count that you have the magical crafter feat but nothing else.
Thanks for the input. For crafting the character would be considered Trained for skill checks?
Donald wrote: Thanks for the input. For crafting the character would be considered Trained for skill checks? that's the thing, since it doesnt actually gives you new rules about how to go about that stuff, it's better to stick to the existing ones, so using the actual skills of a character and just handwave the "requirements" away (since it does allow you to make something, but it doesnt actually make you better at crafting something)
at least imo.
Raw wise, it does need erratta since it's actually lacking the rules of how to do so within the scope of existing rules. So if you are the GM just rule it one way or another, if you are a player just ask your GM to make a ruling.
to put it simply:
"you can craft" = you automatically meat the requirements to do so.
But nothing changes the actual Roll (Craft) or your proficiency with it.
shroudb wrote:
But nothing changes the actual Roll (Craft) or your proficiency with it.
The first line say “you are trained “ with a lower case t. If it were upper case, I’d take that to mean Trained for all rolls. But it does seem odd you spend a feat and are still at a minus for doing part of the feat.
Donald wrote: shroudb wrote:
But nothing changes the actual Roll (Craft) or your proficiency with it.
The first line say “you are trained “ with a lower case t. If it were upper case, I’d take that to mean Trained for all rolls. But it does seem odd you spend a feat and are still at a minus for doing part of the feat. Even if it was a capital in the "trained" word it wouldnt matter because that sentence reads: you are trained in th USE of them.
it has nothing to do with the crafting part.
as for being in a minus, how so? From what i can tell, the fact that you directly bypass any and all requirements is an added benefit of the feat. Other crafting archetypes like Snarecrafter, Poisoner and etc as an example, not only dont give you such bonuses, but have the craft skill as a requirement to boot.
Otiamros wrote: Mellored wrote: It says you can, so you can.
That said, I think this needs an errata to have trained in crafting as a prerequisite.
I think it might be intentional that it doesn't. There is value within the archetype whether you have crafting or not due to the free items, and the ability to craft normal permanent ones at a low level with an untrained craft skill would still be allowed (though of limited usefulness).
But I could see how someone at high level and untrained in craft might be a bit confused when they go to make a permanent version of the same thing they've been making daily for free and it's nigh impossible for them.
I think if it was intentional, they would have added "even if you do not have crafting".
Though, if we look at alchemists dedication. It gives crafting training + temporary potions.
So crafting training + temporary trinkets would make more sense.
Mellored wrote: Otiamros wrote: Mellored wrote: It says you can, so you can.
That said, I think this needs an errata to have trained in crafting as a prerequisite.
I think it might be intentional that it doesn't. There is value within the archetype whether you have crafting or not due to the free items, and the ability to craft normal permanent ones at a low level with an untrained craft skill would still be allowed (though of limited usefulness).
But I could see how someone at high level and untrained in craft might be a bit confused when they go to make a permanent version of the same thing they've been making daily for free and it's nigh impossible for them.
I think if it was intentional, they would have added "even if you do not have crafting".
Though, if we look at alchemists dedication. It gives crafting training + temporary potions.
So crafting training + temporary trinkets would make more sense. and if we look at Snarecrafter it doesnt and it has it as a requirement. Same for poisoner.
All multiclass archetypes give a trained skill, so it only makes sense for alchemist dedication to give one, but for profession archetypes it usually requires said skill as a requirement and doesnt give it for free.
i'm still of the opinion that it simply is missing said requirement, and that's a boon, because it allows someone to simply focus on the temporary talismans without wasting his skills on the permanent ones if he doesnt want to.
when something calls for the normal crafting rules it specifies the craft activity (and often what elements of the activity it changes or ignores). This doesn't and it seems to intentionally just let you make things as long as you have the formula (like with alchemical reagents)
shroudb wrote: and if we look at Snarecrafter it doesnt and it has it as a requirement. Same for poisoner. Snare's have their own crafting rule.
"You must have the Snare Crafting feat to create snares. You can spend 1 minute to Craft a snare at its listed Price. If you want to Craft a snare at a discount, you must spend downtime as described in the Craft activity. Some snares have additional requirements beyond those stated in the Craft activity; these snares list their requirements in a Craft Requirements entry."
Posioner does have "Prerequisites trained in Crafting"
https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx?ID=71
Mellored wrote: shroudb wrote: and if we look at Snarecrafter it doesnt and it has it as a requirement. Same for poisoner. Snare's have their own crafting rule.
"You must have the Snare Crafting feat to create snares. You can spend 1 minute to Craft a snare at its listed Price. If you want to Craft a snare at a discount, you must spend downtime as described in the Craft activity. Some snares have additional requirements beyond those stated in the Craft activity; these snares list their requirements in a Craft Requirements entry."
Posioner does have "Prerequisites trained in Crafting"
https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx?ID=71 i know that it has. both have it. That was my entire point:
others have it as a prepreq, so, it not being a prereq is already an "extra" bonus compared to them. no point in granting a skill proficiency on top of it.
so, because something has a bonus already (doesnt have the prereq) we need to give it a 2nd bonus on top of it? (granting proficiency)?
it already has a plus in not needing to have the skill to get the dedication, but because it has this plus we need to give it a skill on top of it?
now, don't misunderstand me, i wouldnt mind if the errata gave it a skill on top of what it already offers (trained skills are cheap) but since it already works without it, i don't see a reason to have to houserule one atm.
shroudb wrote:
as for being in a minus, how so?
My mistake, I was thinking untrained was -4 and not zero.
Another hitch is you there is no provision for using down time to reducing the cost if your untrained. If I'm understanding it correctly, you'd be paying the same amount in materials to make and finish a Talisman as you would to buy it.
Recent threads in Rules Discussion
|
