Artificer's Handbook - anyone got it?

[Storminator]

Well, the book specifically states thatthe maximum bonus is +5. But, let's see if we can extrapolate it out anyway.

A +10 sword would be a dual bonus item, +10/+10 in terms of monetary cost. To create it, you would need 2 + 10 = 12 spell slots. These would be 10 + 1 = 11th level spell slots with a minimum caster level of 22.
The GP cost would be 10 x (11 + 22 - 1) x 12^2. Or, something like 46080 gp x 2 for the dual bonus feature, or 92160 gp. And will take 396 hours to make.

Hmm, a bit cheap, even considering that the market value is doubled up to 184,320 gp.

Still, even at epic levels, how many people are going to have 12 - 11th level spell slots?

Perhaps a better example to see how we can abuse the system is to use a +7 sword.

9 - 8th level spell slots with 16th level as minimum caster. It will have 37260 gp in creation cost with a market value of 74520 gp and will take 216 hours to make.

It does seem like there should be an Epic modifier. While crafting Epic weapons shouldn't be impossible, it might be a little too easy if you are just extending out the rules from the Artificer's Handbook.

I would be interested in hearing how Curtis would weigh in though. (Although, I guess he would have to do so in an informal manner since ELH isn't in the SRD yet.)

[Edit - I see Curtis has already posted!!]

To get 12 11th level slots requires 39st level and 13 feats, each feat spent on the bonus spell slot feat. If you don't throw in anything for the feats, that's 10*(11+39-1)*12^2*2 = 141120, which is a little closer. Is there a modifier for feats? If so, that might push things up where they belong.

PS

 

[Psion]

Um, hope nobody minds a bit of thread necromancy here, but I am beginning to see some things that I would like to see.

As with many people, I didn't quite see why the redundant item creation feats were needed and was ready to adopt the new item creation feats whole hog.

However, as more time passes, I am stumbling on more situations where I would like to see some limitations or exclusiveness in magic items (or at least some options or techniques for such.) One example is that some items seem to be exclusive to prestige classes and a central part of their concept (such as the jewel mage in Bastion's Spells & Magic or the Crystal Master from WotC Mind's Eye series of psionic articles.)

Also, it would be interesting seeing some sort of methodology where you can limit some item type to certain "slots" or make methods where you can make items more desirable in certain item slots.

 

[der_kluge]

Psion, interesting points.

We have the "neither advantage or disadvantage" or limiting a magic item to a specific race or class. Dwarven thrower, for example. We argued back and forth on it, but concluded that, ultimately, requiring a specific race, class, religion, alignment, PrC, whatever, was neither both a positive and a negative. It's a positive because if you die, or someone steals your magic item, they can't use it. But it's also bad, because you're essentially stuck with it forever, and you can't let any of your friends use it. I might argue that an item with a "only good people can use it" might be a slight advantage if your entire party is good-aligned, because then anyone in the party *could* use it, but there are generally drawbacks to placing limitations on an item such as these.

On the second point, I think there is a brief discussion in the instability rules that talks about incurring instability if you make an item that goes in a slot that makes no sense. Boots of detect thoughts, or a hat that grants +10 to Jump checks. There's nothing in the rules that stops you from doing it, but we opted to just have the item incur instability. These items are clearly in the wrong spot, but some are more vague, so we just left it up to the DM and of course the amount of instability is flexible, so you could apply either a little or a lot depending on how obviously out-of-place the item was.

 

[Psion]

Psion, interesting points.

We have the "neither advantage or disadvantage" or limiting a magic item to a specific race or class. Dwarven thrower, for example. We argued back and forth on it, but concluded that, ultimately, requiring a specific race, class, religion, alignment, PrC, whatever, was neither both a positive and a negative. It's a positive because if you die, or someone steals your magic item, they can't use it. But it's also bad, because you're essentially stuck with it forever, and you can't let any of your friends use it. I might argue that an item with a "only good people can use it" might be a slight advantage if your entire party is good-aligned, because then anyone in the party *could* use it, but there are generally drawbacks to placing limitations on an item such as these.

I sense we are talking about two different things on this point. I am not talking about items that cannot be used by certain people (though, since you bring it up, although I see where you are coming from advantage-wise, I tend to think it would cost more to make one that is exclusive, just because it takes extra effort.... BID.)

No, I am talking about having certain items or item capabilities that only certain casters can make. Again, I refer you to the Jewel Mage in Spells and Magic. It has class abilities that allow it to create gems that can trap creatures or a soul gem that acts as a soul protection and permanent magic jar.

Now the general attitude of the Artificer's Handbook tends to be "if you can dream it -- and afford it -- you can do it". But the thing is that in cases like I discuss, the special items some classes create are in essence defining characteristics. By allowing any character with the right feats and spells to make it, you sort of negate the purpose of the class.

One way to address this, I think, would be to alter the class ability to allow the creation of the mentioned items but at a significant discount in terms of time or cost, to reflect the fact that these "special items" are in fact an extension of the class abilities of the class in question.

Another approach is if the ability does not comfortably match any spell description, in which case the solution is to have the class be the only access to the ability.

On the second point, I think there is a brief discussion in the instability rules that talks about incurring instability if you make an item that goes in a slot that makes no sense. Boots of detect thoughts, or a hat that grants +10 to Jump checks. There's nothing in the rules that stops you from doing it, but we opted to just have the item incur instability. These items are clearly in the wrong spot, but some are more vague, so we just left it up to the DM and of course the amount of instability is flexible, so you could apply either a little or a lot depending on how obviously out-of-place the item was.

Sure, I can understand that. But what I am sort of going for here is perhaps some better defined suggestions regarding "what is appropriate" for a given slot.

 

[der_kluge]

Ok that makes sense. I wasn't familiar with either class you mentioned, so I figured I might have missed the mark on what your intent was. Would have to think on that a bit, but I think it would, as you describe, be an attribute of the class itself, not of the rule system.

On the second point, yes, I can see that that would be handy, if not a bit verbose.

 

[Storminator]

Bah!

Stop discussing this book! My copy won't arrive for ANOTHER week!

PS

 

[Crothian]

Bah!

Stop discussing this book! My copy won't arrive for ANOTHER week!

PS

The cool kids got it at Gen Con

 

[Nifelhein]

Bah!

Stop discussing this book! My copy won't arrive for ANOTHER week!

PS

The cool kids got it at Gen Con

Hmpf!


I live too far to go to Gen Con and my copy won't arrive before one week, maybe two more, what makes me even more upset is that by that time I will be making so much tests at college that i won't even have the time to read it, just look at it on the shelf and go back to my college books...

Oh god...

 

[der_kluge]

The cool kids got it at Gen Con

The even cooler ones got theirs autographed, right?

Well, I autographed a few, but I can't recall if I signed yours or not.

 

[Crothian]

The even cooler ones got theirs autographed, right?

Well, I autographed a few, but I can't recall if I signed yours or not.

I'm not that cool. I wasn't able to get anything autographed at Gen Con this year.