Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5704272" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Whenever I decide to craft arms or armor, I do it directly. Dancing makes me money, mechanically, and that's it. Of course, Craft Arms and Armor can do that, too, so mechanically they're pretty even.However, Perform (Dance) can be used to influence NPCs. As can Craft Arms and Armor. How is that not the same? Why is Craft Wondrous even coming up? The question wasn't whether or not Craft Arms and Armor was better than Craft Wondrous for a Wizard, it's whether it was better at directly benefiting the Wizard than a metamagic feat was for a Fighter. I mean, you said:That's just not true. And I've disputed it. Saying, "it's not good design" or "Craft Wondrous is better" are things I'm not going to argue with you over, because I have no beef with those value judgments.Look, the feat didn't meet my design standards (neither did any magic crafting feat). It's not about me defending its design value. It's about whether or not the feat can be used to directly help the wizard. I don't feel like I'm getting a consistent answer on what "direct" means to you in this context. You said: Couldn't this just say:Aren't these both the exact same thing? And, if not, is that because of activity? The skill lets you dance, but you can't wear the armor? Well, what if you want a guy who can make magic armor? Now, isn't the activity, "the skill lets you dance, and the feat lets you make magical armor"? Aren't they both just as active at directly helping those goals? And, can't they both aid your character through other methods, like influencing NPCs?Well, Leadership is affected here, too. As is Weapon Focus. Sometimes, swinging a greatsword isn't an option, and sometimes, taking a cohort into an area isn't an option. Feats aren't always helpful. They're conditional. I take it you like feats that apply more often than not. That's fine. However, that's not really the issue, here.Potentially, yep. Though, to be fair, Craft Wondrous can do the following for you as a Wizard:(1) Save you money or make you money.(2) Outfit your party.(3) Outfit your allies.(4) Make you new allies.(5) Make you new contacts.(6) Give you political pull.(7) Give you items otherwise unattainable (low magic setting, not on the market, etc.).(8) Make items that you'll put into a magic item slot yourself.Now, Craft Arms and Armor will do the following for a Wizard:(1) Save you money or make you money.(2) Outfit your party.(3) Outfit your allies.(4) Make you new allies.(5) Make you new contacts.(6) Give you political pull.(7) Give you items otherwise unattainable (low magic setting, not on the market, etc.).We're missing one thing: "Make items that you'll put into a magic item slot yourself." If we look at Perform (Dance) (which meets your standards), it can directly help you dance, much like Craft Arms and Armor can directly help you make magic weapons and armor. Anything beyond that, and it helps you in exactly the same way that Craft Arms and Armor does.I'm pretty sure I've been over this before, but to answer you: while it didn't live up to my standards for my game, I don't think it's bad design.If I'm pedantic, why even include "probably" in that sentence? Craft Arms and Armor has leaps and bounds more use than a Fighter with a metamagic feat.So, yeah, that's part of what I disagreed with. Now I just don't understand what you mean by "directly". I can't peg it down. If I knew what that meant, and why it seems inconsistent, I'd be pretty happy with this discussion. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification