Subtle Rule Changes

[Starbuck_II]

Magical Equipment: Magical Arms and Armor had caster level prereq's in 3.5 already; minimum 3x's weapon/armor bonus (i.e. +5 required minimum 15th CL)...now whether people paid attention to those or not is another question.

3.5 errated away 70% of caster level requirements.
[SBLOCK]

Caster Level​

Dungeon Master’s Guide,

page 215

​

​

Problem: ​

​

The last two sentences in the section on Caster

Level are ambiguous and potentially misleading.
​

​

Solution: ​

​

Replace with this text: For other magic items, the

caster level is determined by the creator. The minimum caster​

level is that which is needed to meet the prerequisites given.
[/SBLOCK]
The only exceptions was when it explicitly required it like
weapons: " For an item with only an enhancement bonus and no other abilities, the caster level is three times the enhancement bonus"
Similarly for Armor.

Amulet of Mighty Fist: creator’s caster level must be at least three times the amulet’s bonus.

Amulet of NA: caster level must be at least three times the amulet’s bonus;

Bracers of Armor: creator’s caster level must be at least two times that of the bonus placed in the bracer

And I think that was it.
​

 

[Salthorae]

Right, but porpentine was speaking about magical arms and armor specifically.

So I was also talking about magical arms and armor specifically. Any of the special weapon/armor enhancements also have minimum caster levels as well.

 

[porpentine]

Salth - quite right; it's not a change at all, now I check 3.5.

(seems a bit odd in both editions - why keep CL as a requirement for arms/armour, and let it slide for just about everything else? Is a +3 weapon more taboo at low level than a nifty miscellaneous magic item?)

The 7 for 4: the point-buy system has changed in PF: a 7 stat now garners you more purchasing points than in 3.5. (I think an 18 is also more expensive, but don't have an old PHB to check; in any case I don't think an 18 is so much more costly that ardent minmaxers won't leap at a 7 dumpstat for a turbocharged primary/secondary).

I've seen suggestions that this was changed because the old point-buy system isn't open content, which might be true - but the upshot of the
specific change on the 7 is that minmaxing becomes more advantageous. Not great (though I'm looking forward to playing PF in most respects).

 

[Stalker0]

Salth - quite right; it's not a change at all, now I check 3.5.

The arms/armor prereq is not, however it is a big change for most wonderous items.

In 3.5, the CL for most items was just a measure of how difficult it was to dispel an item, and how long some of its effects last. In PF they are hard requirements. For example, pearls of power now require a very high caster level to craft.

BUT!! As far as I can tell, here's a workaround. PF gives you the ability to ignore a prereq for a +5 to the craft DC. You still have to meet the minimum CL to cast any spells the item requires, but if the CL of the item is higher than that, you can still make it with that +5 DC.

 

[porpentine]

Getting off-topic, but as a disturbing eg of PF creation:

To create a Pearl of Power in PF would require a DC22 Spellcraft check, a bit of gold, a feat, and (a special requirement), ability to cast spells of the appropriate level. It is an unusually tricky creation. (But possibly not at hard as you suggest, Stalker - you don't have to be CL 17 yourself. This has always been confusing and still is).

So, 3rd level Elven Wizard, 18 Int: he has Craft Wondrous and - because he's a dedicated crafter - Focus (Spellcraft). So already he has a Spellcraft of 13.

First he makes a Headband of Vast Intelligence+2 (2000gp, Spellcraft DC13 - autosuccess unless a 1 fails, haven't checked). Now he has 20 Int and Spellcraft 14.

A Pearl of Power II is still a gamble, but even at 3rd he can make it with 2000gp and an 8+.

Fortunately for the DM, his expected wealth is 3000 at 3rd, so he has to wait until 4th, when he succeeds on a 7+. At that level he also makes a Handy Haversack (dc19 if he ignores the requirement for the Secret Chest spell; his Spellcraft is 15, so that's what he does - it only costs 1000gp a shot). He stuffs the Haversack full of scrolls, and is already a walking powerhouse with Int 21, scrolls of everything (move action to retrieve), and probably a pearl, as well as a super-Pearl in his bonded item.

At 7th he makes a +4 Headband for 8000gp (dc a nonissue), bringing his Int to 23 and his Spellcraft to 19. His expected wealth is 23,500, so he also enchants his Bonded ring. He doesn't even need a feat for this (though he does need to be 7th level). He makes it a Ring of Counterspells (dc19 if he ignores the need for Imbue With Spell Ability: gp cost is 2000gp) which again is a nonissue. He casts Dispel Magic into the ring.

At 10th he has an expected wealth of 62k. He creates a +6 Headband for 16k. He now has an Int of 26, and Skill Focus gives him +6: his Spellcraft is 27. He crafts a Cloak of Etherealness (27.5k, dc25 if he ignores the spell requirement). Unless the DM is being tough (as he has to be) the wizard sells his old headbands and whatnot and invests in something else major - really the world is his oyster. Wondrous items are like a second spell list for him now.

Not so hard, eh?

To my mind it's actually way too easy. For an inexperienced DM, this stuff is a nightmare. Note that the Pearl is unusually tough - many items are much easier. Crafting magic items can easily become game-breaking.

I wish it was harder in PF, but it isn't. Since it's harder to buy magic items in the Pathfinder world, shouldn't it be harder to make them? In most cases, though, the DC is almost pointless. On top of that you can use Craft skills as creation feats in PF (edit: actually no; see below), and ignore requirements by hiking the DC, and wizards are enchanting their bonded items without even a feat investment (though since that's one non-sellable item, it's not such a big deal).

 

[Atlatl Jones]

On top of that you can use Craft skills as creation feats in PF, and ignore requirements by hiking the DC, and wizards are enchanting their bonded items without even a feat investment (though since that's one non-sellable item, it's not such a big deal).

That's not quite right. You can use Craft skills instead of Spellcraft, not instead of the item creation feats. You can ignore some prerequisites by upping the DC, but the item creation feat is always required. From the PFSRD: "The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory."

 

[porpentine]

Yeah, you're right. I was thinking of the Master Craftsman feat, but actually you still need to take Craft Wondrous or Craft Arms also.

It still means there are more magic items floating around. I'm not bothered about the realism issues (more magic items, yet in PF they're harder to find for sale) but I do feel, personally, that making magic item creation easier makes things harder for new DMs. It's a Can of Worms +5. The DC sounds like it makes things more difficult, but it's not risky enough to do so. No XP costs either.

 

[billd91]

Yeah, you're right. I was thinking of the Master Craftsman feat, but actually you still need to take Craft Wondrous or Craft Arms also.

It still means there are more magic items floating around. I'm not bothered about the realism issues (more magic items, yet in PF they're harder to find for sale) but I do feel, personally, that making magic item creation easier makes things harder for new DMs. It's a Can of Worms +5. The DC sounds like it makes things more difficult, but it's not risky enough to do so. No XP costs either.

I'm not at all sure how there are more magic items since the primary limiting factors are still in place - it takes at least one feat, they cost money, and they take time (the XP cost usually ended up being a very modest affair).
Surely, the character gung ho into making stuff in your examples would have been just as gung ho in 3.5.

 

[porpentine]

Bill - he's not that gung-ho, really, in PC setup terms anyway: he's starting with a 16 Int before racial adjustments, and he's only invested 2 feats in crafting. If he was really mad keen he'd take Magical Aptitude and start with 20 Int, and maybe take some other creation feats later.

Would he have been crafting so much in 3.5? I did see players do it (and it made for scary wizards). But the XP cost was a limiting factor. Yes, the crafter ended up regaining xp faster, due to the level/CR/xp ratio thing - but he'd still be behind, sometimes a level, sometimes most of one, and that is going to put people off.

Are there more magic items in PF? Like I say, I'm not unduly worried about the realism of economics, but there are going to be more crafters, aren't there? A dwarven fighter with Master Craftsman and Craft Arms/Armour - surely there'll be a few of those around. Gnomes are obsessive crafters/professionals (+2 one skill), so Master Craftsman makes great sense for them too. Any non-spellcaster will still need two feats (MC and either craft wondrous or arms/armour), but the pool of magical crafters is probably expanded.

Anyway, that's not what concerns me. What I worry about, a little, is that the crafter-wizard is now more easily doable, without lagging in levels, and that can be a headache to DM if the DM isn't ready for it.

 

[billd91]

Bill - he's not that gung-ho, really, in PC setup terms anyway: he's starting with a 16 Int before racial adjustments, and he's only invested 2 feats in crafting. If he was really mad keen he'd take Magical Aptitude and start with 20 Int, and maybe take some other creation feats later.

It's not the setup, really. It's the behavior. A character could hit that pace of magic item creation, but you really have to be pretty gung-ho to do it, build or no.

Are there more magic items in PF? Like I say, I'm not unduly worried about the realism of economics, but there are going to be more crafters, aren't there? A dwarven fighter with Master Craftsman and Craft Arms/Armour - surely there'll be a few of those around. Gnomes are obsessive crafters/professionals (+2 one skill), so Master Craftsman makes great sense for them too. Any non-spellcaster will still need two feats (MC and either craft wondrous or arms/armour), but the pool of magical crafters is probably expanded.

There certainly could be more crafters in the party. But just as importantly, they don't have to be all dependent on the goodwill of the party spellcasters in order to have the same benefit. One of the main problems with the crafting rules in 3x is the way it allows spellcasters to get gear for half-price compared to other classes. That meant that the fairly carefully balanced and cheaper pricing of defensive bonuses like resistance was less of an advantage over the more expensive enhancement bonus for spell-casting stat bonuses.
At least fighters and wizards, as far as magical equipment goes, can be put on a more even footing.

Anyway, that's not what concerns me. What I worry about, a little, is that the crafter-wizard is now more easily doable, without lagging in levels, and that can be a headache to DM if the DM isn't ready for it.

Having a couple of heavy crafters in a game I'm running, the XP cost has never been a big problem. The lag ends up being quite infrequent, when it appears at all. Money and time have proven to be much bigger limiters.