Hey Luis, you're pretty much describing both the Artificing system as is, as well as the Magic Item system in
Westbound, the Tabletop RPG I made before this. its so eerily accurate that I feel like you might be trolling me...
Hey Blue, I agree with you, but only in that we seem to differ in our fundamental philosophies. I agree that, in a Dungeon Crawl scenario where Combat is king, anything beyond the Gold+EXP equation will tip the scales one way or the other.
However, in an Open World scenario with a balance of combat, exploration, and social interactions, there is no "Balancing Math," as the open world aspect means that the players adjust to the world and not the other way around. In this case, gaining power does not increase the difficulty of the world, but the difficulty of challenges the players choose to seek. Rats do not become more fierce, instead the encounter is skipped as it is deemed too trivial. This is the philosophy I typically use.
Now, when I said "Balanced for the GM," I meant that Artificing does not cause the game to come to a halt, generally because a player became too powerful. The question of Balance in this case is, "Does Artifcing break the game?" or another way of putting it, "Does Artificing make the job of the GM harder?" I would argue no, but i would love to hear what you have to say about it.
Similarly, Thaumogenesis cannot be quantified in numbers or points, but in risk and fear. Would you risk creating a powerful creature, or do you fear for your safety. In my limited experience in testing the system, most players give in to fear rather than create a magic item. In a Dungeon Crawl scenario the creation of an Anti-Artifice would be balanced by the increase in difficulty derived from the new enemy Anti-Artifice that joins the enemy ranks.