Crafting Wonderous Items question

[Spatzimaus]

By the core rules, there's nothing stopping your DM from adding a Ring of Charisma to the game. It would require Forge Ring instead of Craft Wondrous Item, and as DM I'd say it requires the same spell (Charm Monster?). But, there's nothing in the rules that says it has to require any spells at all, since it doesn't reproduce a spell effect.

However, as DM, I don't like making slots entirely interchangeable. It makes item creation Feats (especially Wondrous) FAR more desirable than finding items for yourself; after all, if I have a hat, bracers, gloves, belt, and cloak already, I'd much rather make my next item an amulet, while if I find items I might have to make some decisions.

Anyway, what I did IMC was this:
First, any item with a numerical bonus explicitly requires caster level 3xBonus (except Bracers of Armor, which are 2xBonus).
Then, for each numerical item, I list two slots. One is the Greater slot, one is the Lesser. Greater slots can have +2, +4, or +6, while Lesser slots can only have +2 or +4. If you want to research a new item, it'll always be Lesser if it's a Wondrous item (Rings are always Greater).
For example, STR items have belts as greater and gloves/gauntlets as lesser in the DMG already. Now, we just go through the rest of the stats in a rotation. In most cases, the one listed in the DMG becomes the greater, although in two slots (amulet and cloak) there was overlap.
IMC, DEX has gloves/gauntlets as the greater and boots as the lesser. +Saves has boots as greater (a bit of a fudge but it's worked) and cloaks as the lesser. CHA has cloak as greater and hat as lesser. INT has headband/hat as greater and... well, you get the idea. After six stats, plus Natural Armor, Saves, and Armor, you cover all the common slots except for Rings.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

We had rings of constitution I think.

If the DM allows nonstandard stuff, sure, go ahead. In our campaign, that stuff was a little more expansive (+2 cost 4500 instead of 4000).

 

[Murrdox]

No one in our party has any item creation feats... the player just wanted to pay one of the local high-level wizards to create the item for him.

Does it really make any difference whatsoever though? I've rarely ever run into a situation where I have a magic helmet or something, and then see a magic item I'd like to procure which uses the same slot.

You couldn't switch around some other items though... for example, a "Cloak of Elvenkind" can't really be turned into a "Belt of Elvenkind"... but you could just make a belt with a +10 circumstance bonus to hide, and name it something else.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

Just out of curiosity, what if my character (using Craft Wondrous Item) created a Pearl of Healing which worked in every way like a Wand of Cure Light Wounds, including only 50 charges, etc.? Would it have the same cost as the wand? Would that allow me to simulate wands with this one feat?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Just out of curiosity, what if my character (using Craft Wondrous Item) created a Pearl of Healing which worked in every way like a Wand of Cure Light Wounds, including only 50 charges, etc.? Would it have the same cost as the wand? Would that allow me to simulate wands with this one feat?

I'd be inclined to say that's a Wand in the shape of a Pearl, and would require the Craft Wands feat.

Monte weighs in on the topic here:

Since a caster with the Create Wondrous Item feat can create items that perform the same function as potions, wands, rods, and staffs (ointment of cure light wounds -- a la Keoghtom's -- instead of potion of cure light wounds, stone of lightning bolt instead of wand of lighting bolt, etc.) why would anyone, under standard book rules, ever take anything other than the Create Wondrous Items feat?

Here's where the DM's fiat comes in. The general rule is that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. If a player wants to make an item using Craft Wondrous Item, but it's really more appropriate to a ring or a wand (in the DM's opinion), the DM should rule that it must be the item that he feels is most appropriate.

If a DM wants to be flexible, he should go the other way. Allow a cleric to make her holy symbol into a wand using Craft Wand, or a sword into a staff using Craft Staff. I know there are lots of wondrous items in the DMG that serve as bad examples, because they really should be a wand, a potion, or a rod. Mea culpa.

-Hyp.

 

[Azure Trance]

Back in 2nd Edition, wasn't it 4 rings that could be worn instead of the 2 that it is in 3rd? Or am I imagining things?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Don't know about 2E, but it was two rings in 1E...

-Hyp.

 

[dcollins]

Is there anything that prevents you from making a "cloak of charisma" into a "ring of charisma"? Namely, can you make an item like a cloak of charisma, only have it be a ring?

Yes. There is the fact that, by default, players can only choose to craft from the pre-existing lists of items in the core rules. Anything outside that is a specific exception made by the DM in question.

As you suspect, the slots-system breaks down pretty rapidly if the DM arbitrarily allows replacements like this (and the cloak of charisma is a prime example of the type of thing players would prefer to swap out.).

www.superdan.net/dndfaq3.html

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Back in 2nd Edition, wasn't it 4 rings that could be worn instead of the 2 that it is in 3rd? Or am I imagining things?

Only two rings AFAIK

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Crafting Wonderous Items question

Yes. There is the fact that, by default, players can only choose to craft from the pre-existing lists of items in the core rules. Anything outside that is a specific exception made by the DM in question.

Dear dcollins,

Shut up already.

As you suspect, the slots-system breaks down pretty rapidly if the DM arbitrarily allows replacements like this

No, it doesn't.