Crafting Feats: Monte vs Core

[Suldulin]

I'm trying to convince my DM to go with Monte's version of the Crafting feats, but he is worried about it being unbalanced. While I'm of the opinion that it a) makes more logical sense, and b) is actually more balanced because it seals up the loopholes you can abuse vie craft wonderous items.

Most of his disagreements seem to center around a human crafter wizard being able to get all the crafting feats and still have 9 feats to play with instead of only having 6 feats to play with. In addtion that for some reason that I can't figure out, he seems to think monte's version means you can make constant wands/staffs/scrolls/rings of +5 heavy fortification with no extra cost for the slotless varients :\ (and ignoring the fact that there's precendent that you could do so anyway in the core (Arms and Equipment bracers of armor and Dracomancion Gem of Fortification))

So any help/advice how to properly phrase my request/anyone have any game experience/playtesting?

 

[GuardianLurker]

I actually adapted Monte's feats for use in a more standard 3.x game. Among other things, I added a few fillips to address the 6 vs. 9 feat problem.

Here's the link: http://users.adelphia.net/~glurker/Olerra/HouseRules/ItemCreationFeats.html

I don't forsee any problems with it. The mage has a feat or two, but hasn't ever used his downtime to create an item.

 

[Li Shenron]

What's Monte's rationale behind the change? (I get that he has merged or rearranged the feats into 5 only instead of 8, did he go with activation method type?)

 

[Gez]

The D&D crafting feats are combination of form and function. The AU crafting feats are function only.

 

[Staffan]

What's Monte's rationale behind the change? (I get that he has merged or rearranged the feats into 5 only instead of 8, did he go with activation method type?)

The feats used in Arcana Unearthed are:
Craft Spell Completion Item (basically scrolls)
Craft Single-use Item (basically potions, though somewhat expanded in function - you can make "grenades" with it, for example).
Craft Charged Item (wands without a spell level limit, and you can make items usable by anyone for a slightly higher cost)
Craft Constant Item (would be used for most wondrous items, rings and rods)
Craft Magic Arms & Armor.

One notable thing about the AU feats is that Constant Item requires a caster level of 12. This ought to mean that these types of items should be more rare, but there's no mention of this in the books. Personally, I think that's a little excessive, especially when the other feats keep their caster level requirements from D&D (1 for Completion, 3 for Single-use, 5 for Charged, and 5 for Arms & Armor).

 

[RangerWickett]

I think the permanency spell should be a feat, and it should let you make wondrous item-ish powers permanent when attached to a creature or object.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

I've thought that, as well. What do you think the adjustment should be? Uses a spell slot 4 levels higher than the spell you wish to make permanent?

 

[Liquidsabre]

I think the permanency spell should be a feat, and it should let you make wondrous item-ish powers permanent when attached to a creature or object.

Exactly, just like what was done for contingency spells: Craft Contingency Spell, they should have Craft Permanent Spell to cover this sort of thing.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

Exactly, just like what was done for contingency spells: Craft Contingency Spell, they should have Craft Permanent Spell to cover this sort of thing.

*blink-blink* Where is Craft Contingency Spell found???

 

[Plane Sailing]

One notable thing about the AU feats is that Constant Item requires a caster level of 12.

-snip-

Personally, I think that's a little excessive, especially when the other feats keep their caster level requirements from D&D (1 for Completion, 3 for Single-use, 5 for Charged, and 5 for Arms & Armor).

I'm guessing that he chose caster level 12 because that follows the D&D standard for rings.

The one issue that isn't covered by Monte's 3.0 based list is staves - items which are charged but which can use the wielders caster level rather than the caster level it is created at.

It should be simple to create a new feat in that vein with a base caster level requirement of 8. This would also narrow the gap in total number of feats required.

To the original posters DM... monte-style feats at least reduce the overwhelming benefit that Craft Wondrous Item has compared to all the other crafting feats - available early but it allows you to create charged items, defensive items, offensive items, permanent items etc. etc. Monte's system closes that loophole nicely.

Cheers