Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Reconciling Item Creation
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Varianor Abroad" data-source="post: 1212824" data-attributes="member: 12425"><p>Monte's system doesn't replace the DMG creation rules. It just changes the feat structure. So you can make a "Multiple" item, you just follow the DMG rules to do it. You would need Craft Constant Item.</p><p></p><p>The AU system doesn't restrict the form of the item either. Craft Charged Item, for example, states that a charged item is <em>typically</em> a wand. But you're not locked into that. I'm playing in a game where I have an armband with charges. So the Veriform item feat isn't needed in standard AU. You still follow standard rules, so that most items created take up <em>a</em> slot. The creator determines which one. If you want a slotless item, you pay for it. It could be helpful for a crossover campaign with some having 3.# crafting and others having the AU version to prevent players from complaining about the AU crafter getting more advantages, but I'd just use the AU feats whole. </p><p></p><p>The last feat you have listed is interesting. Are there any further restrictions? It seems like work for the DM to figure prices on items that aren't duplicated by a spell because you have to benchmark the effect and then decide if it should cost more to be Constant, Charged, etc? The idea is cool - it allows for creation of stuff not listed - I just wonder on the implementation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Varianor Abroad, post: 1212824, member: 12425"] Monte's system doesn't replace the DMG creation rules. It just changes the feat structure. So you can make a "Multiple" item, you just follow the DMG rules to do it. You would need Craft Constant Item. The AU system doesn't restrict the form of the item either. Craft Charged Item, for example, states that a charged item is [I]typically[/I] a wand. But you're not locked into that. I'm playing in a game where I have an armband with charges. So the Veriform item feat isn't needed in standard AU. You still follow standard rules, so that most items created take up [I]a[/I] slot. The creator determines which one. If you want a slotless item, you pay for it. It could be helpful for a crossover campaign with some having 3.# crafting and others having the AU version to prevent players from complaining about the AU crafter getting more advantages, but I'd just use the AU feats whole. The last feat you have listed is interesting. Are there any further restrictions? It seems like work for the DM to figure prices on items that aren't duplicated by a spell because you have to benchmark the effect and then decide if it should cost more to be Constant, Charged, etc? The idea is cool - it allows for creation of stuff not listed - I just wonder on the implementation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Reconciling Item Creation
Top