Why is magical item creation always seen as overpowered? It

It comes from a few things.
>Beta GMs that don't know how to say no or limit things.
>Retard GMs who treat it as the boogeyman and nerf it to uselessness
>The ability to make custom magic items can throw a few wrenches in your GM's gears, making it harder for them to run the game.
>Some people just don't understand the difference between RAW and RAI so they end up with the wizard crafting a Touch-activated Channel positive energy 2d6 statue for less than 3,000gp in materials.

>>52545053
If you balance an item with how hard/rare it is to get that item is still going to be unbalanced.

Who cares if your item takes 10 days to make start-to-finish if it just decimates everybody who doesn't have access to it?

>>52545053
>Why is magical item creation always seen as overpowered?

That DMs who are afraid of anyone who understands the game's mechanics because they might derail their Donut Steel epic plot.

That Guy shit players who think Barbarians are overpowered and that top tier spellcasters need buffing.

Because for the low low price of 2,000gp you can make a cloak that casts CLW on the wearer only when they're injured.

>>52545053
>Why is magical item creation always seen as overpowered?
Always, no. However most people are talking about 3.pf D&D which has set an awful precedent for magic item requirements and creation, was horrifically unbalanced, and just conceptually bad rules for magic items. More time and monetary cost is not an impediment to most groups, and the very concept of lowering the cost and time by offering "disadvantages" is as stupid as allowing flaws to gain a greater benefit.

File: 1461004481524.jpg (23KB, 223x224px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 223x224px

More Options = More exploits.
Magic Items can extend a character's abilities in dramatic ways, and in general provide a degree of customization that enable them to highlight their strengths or negate their weaknesses.

In general, it also touches upon the realm of what is often exclusively supposed to be in the control of the GM. There are certain abilities, or combinations of abilities, that can undermine an adventure, and these are typically held under lock and key. You typically need to ask for special permission to play something like a monster that can teleport at will, or you have to discover and obtain a magic item that can make someone fall permanently in love with you, since these are campaign altering abilities. Characters who can create their own magical items, while still subject to GM approval, have a degree more freedom and access to what other characters would have to jump through hurdles for.

Also, the trade-off of Fictional Days of Fictional Work while spending less money than if you had to buy the thing really doesn't matter much outside of being a way for the GM to limit production.

>>52545053
>one player and the DM crafting at the table and wasting everyone's time
pls god no

my dm just gave me a challenge in game to accomplish and if i do i can make my item

>>52545053
I just like it for flavor. I don't want a +1 sword from the barrel of other +1 swords, I want something unique. I want it to be smithed a particular way, the hilt wrapped in a matching or contrasting style. I want unusual materials to be put into it. I want enchantments that will match the theme of the character, even if they're not game breaking ones or optimized ones. I want that sword to survive my character, either passed down the family line or given to a friend's kid, or looted from my character's corpse by some foe who was better than him. I want that sword to come back to haunt my next character, even if there's never a way to claim it again. That's a magical item to me.

>>52545053
>Why is magical item creation always seen as overpowered?

In what game? Because that's the sort of thing that's radically dependent on the ruleset.

Only game I know of where magic item crafting was OP was 3.X D&D (not any edition before or since, just 3.X), because it allowed a character to basically do fucking anything and have every ability.

>>52545238
You're getting really sort of mad for all the wrong reasons. 3.pf provided rules largely as guidelines for the DM, with EXPRESSLY STATED advice that they were loose guidelines that the DM had to weigh in with their own judgement. This was ultimately better than simply not providing any advice at all about item creation, and at no point was there supposed to be any illusion that the DM wasn't in complete control of what was and was not possible or fair.
If anything, it was a step forward from 2e item creation being purely a game of Mother-May-I with a large random chance of failure, and 2e likewise had severe balance issues when it came to what magic items could do.
The only vile and evil thing that 3rd edition did was make magic items more accessible and better understood, which while you may consider that to be a fault, it's just an ultimate symptom of the clarity and general transparency of the system that helped people find the game easier to understand and get into, what ultimately catapulted it to its unprecedented popularity.
This transparency also is what makes it a fine target for people to get upset and complain about the edition, but c'est la vie.

>>52545053
>Heck, anything worth having takes at least 10 days of constant crafting and thousands of gp worth of rare materials.

Also I should point out that "crafting time" is meaningless in 99% of cases because it will happen offscreen, either between sessions or the rest of the party will just wait until the crafting is done and there will be a two week timeskip.

>>52545126
Wait... what? How?!
That's a crazy loose interpretation of the rules to make a statue that does that.
Please elaborate?

>>52545487

If I was GM I would be tempted to throw at least one pressing situation in that caused a hard choice between getting the weapon faster or having to solve the problem that has come up.

>>52545053
i add a zero to every magic item price just to piss off my players
>and balance the game

>>52545490
Believing that since you can use abilities at a lower level (like spellcasting) you can channel at a Lower level. So it's 2000 x CL (3) x SL (N/A or 1). Then make it trigger on touch only to reduce the cost a bit and it should come out to less than 3,000gp in materials.
-asspulling retard logic

>>52545552
>I'd like to purchase this everburning torch.
>>That'll be 1,250gp
>Fuck that. It'll be cheaper to hire a novice wizard to follow me around and constantly cast light on a stick.
Also that really hurts your players.
>We really need to tend to our wounds. Our companion in armor is nearly dead and the priest travelling with us has fallen. How much for your cheapest magical healing remedies?
>5,000gp a bottle. Take it or leave it

>>52545435
Let me find something for you anon. You might like the magic sword creation rules for DCC.
I also added a list of unusual materials that you roll on when making weapons

>>52545487
> He doesn't do crafting sessions

Players often have a better understanding of their own character's strengths and weaknesses then the DM does, simply because they only have to look at themselves.

Magic item creation basically hands the players access to items that can cover their weaknesses or bolster their strengths without the GM being the one to hand them it.

It's not inherently OP, but a powergamer or a weak GM can mean it quickly breaks the power curve.

>>52545670
I know that in pathfinder you can make your weapons out of basically anything. Even rice paper, but it breaks after one successful hit.

>>52545238
>More time and monetary cost is not an impediment to most groups,

>>52545487

>Also I should point out that "crafting time" is meaningless in 99% of cases because it will happen offscreen, either between sessions or the rest of the party will just wait until the crafting is done and there will be a two week timeskip.

What? If this is the case, than you, as the GM, are objectively doing a bad job. There should ALWAYS be more things that the players want to spend their gold on than they have gold to spend it on, and more things that the players want and need to do than they have time for. That's one of the core elements of any RPG; the inability to exercise all desires and the necessity of strategizing.

The way I handle custom item creation is to make it an actual quest. You don't just walk down to the corner store and buy an Ikea-brand Longsword +2, you have to work out what enchantments you want to have on it and then go and acquire the components/travel to the correct location.

It turns magical item creation into a source for adventure, rather than a bunch of weird maths that lets people overpower themselves.

>>52545713
>There should ALWAYS be more things that the players want to spend their gold on than they have gold to spend it on, and more things that the players want and need to do than they have time for.

That's unreasonable. You can have time-limited adventures once in a while, but there is no plausible way to have them ALL the time. There's just no way to have a ticking time bomb in every episode of the show.

>>52545787
>That's unreasonable.

Hardly

> You can have time-limited adventures once in a while, but there is no plausible way to have them ALL the time.

Sure you can, as long as your PCs aren't the only group with agency in the world, which seems to be the case sadly often. The players go to rescue Jimmy from the goblins instead of dealing with Farmer Mcclusky's ankheg problem? By the time they come back, he's already hired a different group of adventurers to take care of it for him, unless of course, they really hurry.

>There's just no way to have a ticking time bomb in every episode of the show.

You don't need to have that. You just need to have lots of people doing lots of things and all wanting it done yesterday, if at all possible.

>>52545787
Sure you can!

Just don't make the timer like, hours or nothing, make it months, years.
Crafting items takes time, if they don't use their years wisely then they might fail their goals

>>52545470

This x1000.

It added mechanics into how it coukd even happen, but was still limited in terms of spending. Podunk hamlet #1000 isn't going to have the raw materials for something like even a moderate (+2) enchanted item, so your characters need to journey to a big trading city or similar to even be able to make anything.

I've run and played in several dozen 3.5 games where this never was an issue. Each time crafting time came up, that was the cue for the builder to sit aside eith the book while the interaction-heavy characters took center stage. Bard going on a drunken bender with the fighter? Yup, perfect time to work on something. Cleric and paladin going on and on about attempts to convert people? Perfect time to work on a few scrolls in the background. Etc etc.

It's like another anon said: it's only a problem with shitty GMs or munchkin players.

>>52545053
>Why is magical item creation always seen as overpowered?
Because without it the players' equipment is totally at the whim of the gm so they can cripple the party's effectiveness however they want and not have to put a single thought towards balancing for anything the players do.

>>52545238
>More time and monetary cost is not an impediment to most groups
How much free downtime the party has and how much money they have is entirely dependent on the gm not even considering requiring special materials for magic items.

If players want to sit in a town for a couple months crafting everything they can find in the book before the big end-battle then give them consequences.
Maybe their enemies change their plans or move ahead with them faster than expected.
Maybe the concentration of magic attracts any of the multiple monsters that eat magic items.

This shit ain't exactly rocket science.

File: sword magic.pdf (2MB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1x1px

>>52545435
>>52545695
here ya go anon.
these are the materials i have players roll for when finding a magic weapon or when i make one for a dungeon or treasure reward. if anyone wants to add to this list, please feel free, i'm always interested in new materials to add to the list, no two weapons should be alike.

(1):Adamantine
(2):Blood Crystal
(3):Bone
(4):Bronze
(5):Cold Iron
(6):Elysian Bronze
(7):Fire-Forged steel
(8):Frost Forged Steel
(9):Gold
(10):Living Steel
(11):Mithral
(12):Obsidian
(13):Silver
(14):Stone
(15):Voidglass
(16):Glass Steal
(17):Red Steel
(18):Black steel
(19):Meteoric Iron
(20):Crystal

>>52545053
I have never heard of magic item creation being considered overpowered. At least from my experience in 3.PF, they tend to be considered fairly mediocre, simply because the majority of games don't give the player much downtime to make items, and often any net wealth increases from using the feats are worth less than having spent the feat on something immediately useful in combat.

It's one of those weird things which varies wildly in value depending on how much downtime the players get. It's also weird, because you're basically selling feat slots for gold pieces.

>>52545053
Thought Bottle cheese, planes with different time progression from the ones you're going to do all of your adventuring on to make the time drawback less severe, feats to further cut down the cost, plus you get exactly what you want/need instead of dealing with loot tables or exactly what the DM wants to give you.

>>52545053

It's a way of bypassing the action economy. I can cast Voice of Katsulas and that has some powerful positive effect for me. Or I can put it into an item that is always on or freely activated, and then I get the same bonus all the time. It's there whether I knew I'd need it on a particular day or not and doesn't draw from my own personal spellcasting resources.

If I have a limited spells per some period, then items usually have their own individual clocks. If I have limited effect selection, then usually item effects don't count towards that. If I have limited effects known, then I get the benefit of selecting from everyone in my group or who I can buy from who has that crafting ability, and then still have my own abilities.

Most especially, I can drastically frontload my powers by taking a lot of time during downtime periods that from an game mechanics standpoint are usually wasted anyway, and then that frees up the crucial turns during combat encounters.

Many games have an itemization element to your power, especially D&D3.x. Crafting means I can overload items to give myself every possible advantage: +6 to all the stats I care about, +30 to all the skills I use, +5 to armor/attacks/saves, spell and energy resistances, and a variety of continuous effects. A normal player gets what the DM decides he finds, or at best what he can persuade his DM to let him buy. A crafter gets to fit out exactly teh optimized item for any situation. All your item slots are filled, and filled optimally.

Games like GURPS use the gadget limitation on powers for exactly this reason. It means that +3 to wombat taming that I get from training, from a spell, from cybernetics, and from a magic item are all more or less priced similarly (subject to the limits imposed by the source of your power). In most games, gear is pretty much a direct add to your personal power anyway.

>>52545487
Then make something happen, force the 10 day requirement to matter

>>52548236
>>52545787

>>52545238
Shit man, i did a bunch of reverse engineering, and almost all the items in 3.pf are either built with the item creation rules, or the item creation rules overprice them by a huge margin. They're actually pretty balanced in my experience.

I'd post a link, but it's on reddit

File: 1476472140326.jpg (107KB, 798x1001px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 798x1001px

>>52546970
That's not even counting purely cosmetic magical effects.
Maybe the flaming sword has blue flames.
Maybe the structure of the weapon is some silly anime bullshit that shouldn't reasonably be an effective weapon.
Maybe wooden parts grow small roots and twigs if left laying on the ground for long enough.

The design can also be an opportunity to expand on the setting or drop hints of potential side-plots.
Some bandits' magic weapons could be from an ancient civilization known for secret stashes of goods and could hint at such a cache nearby.
A shield design in the style favored by a certain royal family could be a hint towards where the missing heir has been.
A specific type of weapon could be a relic from the war waged by a recently collapsed kingdom, no longer made but still encountered in various hands on occasion in any of the surrounding lands.

>>52545053
>>52545053
I have no idea. It smells like autism really. It's really very simple. Common materials can be bought for gold, rarer materials cost more, and the rarest you simply have to go on an adventure to look for. Once you have what you need in materials, you must find a workshop or workbench with tools and maybe a furnace, which costs favors or gold to rent, or you must hire a magical smith. If you didn't hire a smith, you must spend time making the item yourself, you might need to find someone who can train you, which you can be apprenticing for, or if you know already, begin the process. The actual crafting may cost exp, because it is demanding, time-consuming, and maybe requires you to sacrifice part of yourself, like with Sauron and his One Ring.

>>52550909
Simple, reasonable, and the only reason it wouldn't work is bad GM and worse Players.

>>52545053
Not quite item creation, but i told my groups half-celestial paladin (i know i'm retarded for allowing this) that the large greatsword they threw from 150 feet was so funny that the gods decided to bless it.

What i gave it was basically turned into a medium +1 greatsword and made it indestructible, but it can't be enchanted or repaired further. As well, it deals an extra 1d6 for every 50 feet its thrown from.

Is this broken in any way? like, will this be able to fuck up my campaign?

>>52550909
The exp cost to crafting was dumb and should never have been added in. All it does is punish the party as a whole because their crafter is a level (or teonin extreme cases) behind and now can't provide adequate assistance in immediate problems.

>>52550932
Just specify that it has to be thrown and you're golden. An extra few D6 of damage on rare occurrences isn't OP at all (how often is the guy going to throw swords like a football?).

Because of autistic neckbeard grognards.

>>52550938
It depends on the item. The golden rule here is that the exp lost is proportional to the power the item gives you. Sauron was nothing without his ring, but with it he was as strong as before or stronger. If the item isn't powerful enough you don't lose exp. All of this are decisions competent GMs can make.

It isn't OP. At least at earlier levels. What I do is that I make it a challenge to get profit from magic items. You can't sell for profit to a merchant, you can only sell for profit to the people who buy the thing.

>>52550932
It's a weapon a martial class uses to beat enemies with, it won't affect your campaign in any way. Only things affecting spellcasting matter.

>>52550938
At least in dnd it actually works to the party's benefit since casters, who are generally the magic item crafters, already tend to outpace other classes in power so being a level or two behind helps balance things out and actually causes them to gain more xp which they can then spend on more magic items.
The magic items themselves can give easy access to spells to balance out daily limitations and number and type of spell benefits and give special abilities, especially against certain types of damage and attacks, that are otherwise rare and often take multiple levels in certain classes.
These aren't just for the crafter either since the whole party can get a better deal for their gold if they just pay the crafter to make stuff.

>>52550949
Well, in regular circumstances, likely never. But being a flying person with perfect maneuverability due to a feat, they could throw it from some rather high places.

>>52551058
you'd be surprised what a group of idiots can do with an indestructible object.

>>52551065
Yeah no. It's unreasonable to expect me to spend my hard earned XP to craft magic items for your benefit. Buy your own, whatever I craft is for my own use only.

>>52551080
That's falling. Also, falling damage exists on objects already. What's the difference between him dropping his enchanted sword or dropping a rock on it?

>>52551132
Well, in that he can fly and throw it directly downwards.

>>52551126
I don't think you understand what I'm saying, it's for your own benefit as much as the party's.
>and actually causes them to gain more xp
By keeping behind the rest of the party in level you gain more xp and you're not any less powerful because you're investing that extra xp in things like wands or things to protect you from negative levels.

Having the party buy or commission their magic items is just throwing party resources away instead of paying you to make it for less than the market price and you could even keep some or all of the difference for your own use in exchange since it's still better for the party overall for you to have the extra gold instead of some random npc unless your dm has investing in someone have a story impact.

That's not even mentioning alternative rules that allow party members to contribute to crafting.

You can of course play a selfish/stupid character but you're literally throwing away extra money and magic items you could be getting.

Magic items have utilities that simply aren't available when using mundane items.

Furthermore, if the only trade-off is availability, that stops being an issue as soon as characters acquire the items they want.

>>52551191
This is also why artificers can be so broken if you let them.

>>52550782
I like you. DCC states that every magic item should have a story. If you're going to put it in the dungeon then you had best write up its last two owners and history at the very least! When I roll something up I usually give it a cosmetic affect relevant to its purpose, abilities, or material. One of my players rolled up a +1 dagger of meteoric iron, nothing really special about it other than being magical, but it's always warm to the touch and if held under a night sky it reflects the sky.

>>52551355
Yeah it's the little stuff that can also make the difference between a memorable treasure and just another magic item.

>>52551154
This brings up a good question. At what point does a falling object need to only hit touch AC for it to do damage?

>>52551519
Well, that depends, really. i would say once the Damage dice hit 10D6 or so, that would be the point, because its easily gonna break through your armor as well.

A better question, at what point has the object fallen far enough to require a reflex save from the ensuing crater in the surrounding squares.

>>52551556
Maybe it's physics don't work like that? Maybe it lands harmlessly if it doesn't strike an opponent? If gods or angels blessed it I imagine they wouldn't want it causing so much collateral damage

>>52551690
In the grand scheme of things, the amount of damage a 10 foot crater can do to an environment is essentially nothing, as eventually something will grow in that crater, or maybe it'll even turn into a rain catching thing and animals drink out of it.

Nature's a hardy motherfucker, and dropping a hunk of metal from one or two hundred feet ain't gonna even phase it.

>>52551721
>Nature is Hardy
Yeah until humans came along and disproves that easily.

>>52545053
I always use some penalties to the stats when the player uses high-end magical items.
decreases in HP, penalties on certain rolls, personality and alignment changes for characters etc. when it's about to hit game-changing levels.
I dont look much at what it costs on being made, but rather how often you have the opportunity to find certain materials to make this, and what the costs are in the long run.

for example, the demon-slaying weapons i use in an eastern campaign are easily made by sacrificing any kind of demonic creature (you stab them with a regular sword until the are dead, even though it will take some time).
With every killed demon they become stronger, but the party is forced to do purification-pilgrimages to temples from time to time to keep the accumulating stat penalties away from them.

>>52551874
Yeah, but it took us pumping out thousands upon millions of chemicals, deforesting at a rate nature can't keep up with, and nuking shit to cause that.

One sword causing a crater ain't shit comparative to that.

>>52545435
And yet all of what you listed can be summed up as "+1 sword."
Not that it's a bad thing, it's just that you, like me, appreciate when DMs put thought into the weapons they give you.

I think the craziest weapon I've ever had the joy of using was Ascalon, a dragonslaying spear.

It was described as lovingly crafted and almost rococo in style, and was essentially a +1 spear with two hidden abilities, the attack bonus getting higher the larger your enemy was, and the ability to instantly kill any and all dragons. The last ability was discovered when I was hanging off a cliff, and our barbarian out of desperation hurled it at the dragon in order to get to me faster.

>>52552023
Depending on the system, and assuming dnd as a basis, none of what he just said is "just a +1 sword".

Special materials are their own beasts, separate from enchantment, normally. Second, added effects tend to go beyond "+1". In general terms, a +1 weapon is one that is simply slightly better than its non-magical counterpart. Its slightly sharper, slightly harder, slightly more effective, but otherwise exactly the same.

Anything else can't be described as "Just +1"

Even your Ascalon isn't "Just a +1 weapon". Its a "+1 weapon with hidden goodies"

>>52552011
Okay, just because nature is hardy doesn't mean the gods would make something that causes so much collateral damage. What happens when you drop it in a populated area? I'm a city? Nah, I think the whole, "leaves a crater" isn't something good gods would build into a weapon. Too destructive. It's not like the gods have to obey the laws of physics with magic.

>>52552233
First, the person it was given to is a paladin. Ideally, they aren't retarded enough to drop it in a city to start with.

Second, All they did is make it indestructible. Its not like they added a crater making property, thats just something you could do with an object if you dropped it from high enough. Which was my point. At what point would dropping an object, regular or magical, cause a crater, needing a reflex save.

You are too homed in on the weapon itself, but keep in mind gods in many pantheons are way more retarded with their weapons than humans ever could be.

>>52552233
>>52552267
Solution: If thrown at the ground, the sword will always angle itself with the pointy side aiming downwards. Since it's indestructible it'll slip into whatever it fell on if given enough speed, but stop at the hilt since the shape wouldn't cut as well.
What happens to the struck object is up to you, but i expect that, once the campaign is done, your setting will have it's own Sword in the Stone

>>52552434
Very likely, but an average sword, if it hits terminal velocity, would probably end up pointy side down anyways, just due to drag on the guard.

And even if it is indestructible, that doesn't stop the amount of force an object at terminal velocity would provide. Most of that would still go straight into the ground.

>>52552470
If we're talking about terminal velocity then the best you'll get is a hilt sticking out of the ground with a lot of cracks around it. Earth isn't the same as stone or more compact materials, it has a lot of space to move

>>52552497
Ever heard of kinetic bombardment?

>>52552528
Yeah. You need more than a 5lb stick of indestructible aerodynamic metal to cause craters. At most you can probably put a mailbox post in the hole.

File: IMG_3240.jpg (142KB, 736x1282px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 736x1282px

Late game you REALLY need to outfit your melee characters because most thing you're fighting at that level have high spell resistance.

>>52554133
If you can't crack SR like an egg, stop pissing away caster levels.
Even if the GM decides to add 50 points to every SR value, just stop casting spells that allow SR. There's plenty of 'You lose" spells with SR:No.

>>52551065

I disagree, since that means that a martial who wants to have a character built on survivalist-tier self-reliance cannot make his own gear unless he takes levels in a spellcasting class. Locking magic item crafting in to spellcasters just ends up making noncasters worse. Again.

>but you can hire a spellcaster to-
Only if one is available and willing to do the job.

>but scrolls-
What if I don't have UMD trained? Also, why *must* I involve another person in my crafting if I want any kind of relevance past lvl 6?

>>52555157
You're disagreeing with facts. That's how it works in DnD.

It also has absolutely fucking nothing to do with martials being unable to craft, he was just stating that spending your EXP on crafting actually makes you stronger if it costs you a level.

That said, I agree fullheartedly that martials should be able to craft. But shitty ivory tower design, go take it up with your GM.

>>52555157
>I disagree, since that means that a martial who wants to have a character built on survivalist-tier self-reliance cannot make his own gear unless he takes levels in a spellcasting class
You don't actually seem to be disagreeing with me since I never claimed it was a flawless or ideal system, it's just how it works in 3.5 dnd.

Either you need to work on your reading comprehension or stop beating strawmen.

>>52555190
There were some half-hearted attempts at alternative rules but just the way abilities and skills works tends to automatically cripple martials with crafting.

There's also the ever-present problem that whenever a martial wants to do something they're held to the standard of some game designer or writer's amateur misunderstanding of what's "realistic" while casters largely get a free pass because all myths and fantasy media are free game to be bundled together under the banner of what magic can do with a hefty dose of modern anachronistic views of the development of knowledge and technology.

>>52555055
Such as?

>>52555157
Anyway, if I WERE to try to design a better system for magic item creation I would probably add in a much bigger role for special materials or even specific sites for item creation.

Stuff like requiring certain monster parts for certain enchantments or specific items.
I've always really enjoyed when there have been descriptions of monsters that included details of parts of them that had supernatural abilities and could count as treasure.
Like did you know you can actually harvest a beholder's levitation organ? Or that a flail snail's shell can be used to make a spell-turning shield?

>>52555669
Monster Hunter is a shitty meme game and you should be ashamed for emulating it.

>>52555624
Most conjurations and illusions, actually. Forcecage, Glitterdust, Grease, a bunch of the Wall of Thing spells, etc. Basically any illusion that doesn't directly inflict damage also has SR:No and no save until interacted with. If your GM doesn't define interaction as "looked at it", you can make some terrifying no-save-just-die ambushes with illusions, a bit of prep work, and smart thinking.
Or just cut the monster out of the link and buff the fighter.
Or summon things to murder the enemy.
Or turn yourself into King Kong and smash things.
Or say "No thanks" and teleport the whole party away from the random wilderness encounter.
Or use any of the dozens of ways of getting absurd penetration checks and sneer at spell resistance. Or any of the ways to automatically penetrate.


Honestly, the only irritating thing about spell resistance is when some 'tard in the party gets it and won't lower it so you can buff them without having to roll.

>>52555797
>you can only have monster parts as part of making magic items if you're copying monster hunter
Go back to /v/ faggot.
It was a concept in mythology and fantasy long before some jap game that you sperg out over other strangers liking or not.

File: all-you-do-is-suck-cock-and-post-memes-on-15933820[1].png (118KB, 500x541px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 500x541px

>>52555797

>>52555669
I did something similar for a 3.5 Gestalt Campaing based on commerce and crafts (the main villain was something like the Guild in Last Exile, but many occasional villains of different type occurred).

I required that the GS of the monster would be comparable to the caster level and the body part conceptually similar. This would set a number of craft CD (still prepared in base of GS, I know it does not necessarily makes sense but is a level based game after all).

I don't remember the numbers and my stuff is in another country now, but i think this is a good start, it worked for us.

We just had to change the rules for the masterwork. THAT is retarded, because of the time. PF did not address it, the designers did not want (I think people have the screenshot).

>>52555860
This is a very optimistic view on the thing a monster can resist, the way a party is never surprised, and the way monsters are played.

>>52558300
Anon, you know that in 3.PF, conjuration has the entire orb of X spell line that is expressly not affected by SR?
Or that many, many debuffs are not, because many do not rely on directly effecting the creature unless it's a touch spell?
SR is only a problem when it comes to buffs and blasting casters, and this is long known. Do not act like you can come to some new conclusion about the most picked apart game on the market.

>>52558300
You're going to have to back that statement up.
In any given spell-prep cycle I make sure to cover all the bases, so if it turns out that we fight NospellsAllowed Mc50SRandMakesAllSaves I'll just throw some no-save no-SR battlefield control around or shit buffs on the party. Incidentally, this is also exactly what wands, staffs, and scrolls are for.
If we get surprised, then that changes, uh, fucking nothing aside from a round of combat. I can still cast my shit once I get my turn.
Would love to know how a monster will be played to negate a wizard wizarding at full force.

>>52545764
Best answer.

I'm fine if my players want to make a magical item. But depending on what it is they might have to go to Hades and back for the materials.

>>52558300
Or wait, are you saying that a monster's spell resistance can resist spells that say "Spell Resistance: No"? Because that's just objectively wrong. If the spell doesn't care about SR, it doesn't care about SR period full stop.

>>52545053
Because if an item's worth having, it's too powerful. If it's not worth having/you can find better shit in the wild, item crafting is irrelevant and never used.

Therefore item crafting is only used when it's producing shit that's better than other available options, assuming the players aren't mentally defective.

>>52558361
>>52558375
>>52558406

I just say that SR: no does not mean autowin. A creature can see through illusion, orb spells are nullified by energy resistance and/or stuff like Mettle. The right spell at the right moment solves a situation, but you cannot always have the right spell in the right number.

Very true about "buff the party" which is generally the best thing to do.

>Would love to know how a monster will be played to negate a wizard wizarding at full force.
I just found an absurdity the assumption that is easy to surprise monsters.

What buff spells is this wizard supposed to cast? I can't remember spells other than Enlarge Person, Haste, and Fly.

>>52559227
if you wanted to be both believable and disingenuous, you could have at last pretended to remember invisibility.

>>52559324
also Displacement, Stoneskin. And this is just core.

>>52559375
Invisibility runs out as soon as they attack. It's better to buff yourself with invisibility and then start casting all the other buff spells while running around invisible so you don't get shanked.

>>52558478
>Very true about "buff the party" which is generally the best thing to do.
Or summon creatures.
Or polymorph yourself.
Or use different spells that do not directly interact with the creature, like cages, wall of X, etc.
SR is only an obstacle to a blaster wizard or a player who is inexperienced.

>>52559552
It can, to be fair, interfere with some lines of debuffing.

But there's plenty of debuffs (and decent blasts) that don't give a shit about SR.
It's also damn easy to shit on, since you can trivially boost penetration and caster level.

>>52559491
Not improved invisibility. And sometimes one chance is all that is needed.
To clarify - what I said can be inverted. there are spells and combination that look unlikely or weak, until the moment arrive in which they are fantastic.

>>52559617
>To clarify - what I said can be inverted. there are spells and combination that look unlikely or weak, until the moment arrive in which they are fantastic.
Which is why you get them as scrolls.

>>52559617
That's why you keep some spells on scroll for that moment.

>>52559552
>Or summon creatures.
Takes a full round to summon and at most levels your summons can die in one or two hits while having piss poor damage.
>Or polymorph yourself.
Why not polymorph the dude with 7 combat feats and a BAB three times yours? Or maybe we aren't at 9th-10th level yet.
>Or use different spells that do not directly interact with the creature, like cages, wall of X, etc.
Cages are completely unreliable until you get access to Force cage, which by that level (15-16) you're facing outsiders and beings with at-will teleport.

>>52559654
>>52559652
What if you're a sorcerer?

>>52559664
You forgot to mention that Force Cage is negated by a Reflex save, which most monsters have at +15-25 at that level.

>>52559682
A sorcerer can cast any wizard/sorcerer spell he pleases off a scroll, even if he personally doesn't know it.
The requirement is that it's on your list, not that it's a spell you personally know.

And if you're asking how you get them? Throw cash at a wizard.

>>52545627
As expected, your method is dumb and goes against the rules. An item that simulates a spell can be created with any CL possible, TO A MINIMUM of the smallest unmodified CL you can cast the spell with when you get it. So a 1st level spell requires a minimum caster level of 1, a 2nd level spell requires CL 3, and so on.

Now, you're trying to turn Channel Positive Energy, a feat, into an item. That doesn't work and you should be ashamed of that. If you tried to simulate a lv 1 spell, it would be 1 x 1 x 2000, or 2000gp for 5 uses/day. Item spells are measured in uses/day, btw, and 5 is the norm. You lower costs by having it work less times per day. An unlimited item isn't really listed, would be like Eternal Wands and such.

>>52559975
In pathfinder its spell level X caster level X 2,000gp for command use or continuous items. So a CLW gauntlet that casts CLW at CL 1 upon activation an unlimited amount of times per day would cost only 2,000gp.

>>52559845
>And if you're asking how you get them? Throw cash at a wizard.

This is, too way too simplistic. As a GM, I never made the market so easy. There is no Amazon in my setting, unless is a warrior-girl
(inb4 OOTS-style jokes)

>>52552904
In DnD a med greatsword is 8, which is still within reason for a greatsword, albeit a particularly heavy one.

That said, an inch long and 3/8's thick piece of metal dropped can act as a bullet. I could see an object several feet long, a few inches wide, and less than an inch thick doing some fair damage comparatively.

>>52560085
continuous items are for continuous effects like "+4 enhancement str" not for instantaneous spells. Sweet Zapkiel people.

>>52560194
It says command use. It does not say you can't make a instantaneous spell into a command use item.

>>52560171
It's all well and good that you houseruled things, but there's explicit rules for what sort of shit is available for sale in a settlement of a given size. RAW, if I want my CL 5 scroll of Fly, I can buy it in any damn Small Town around.

>>52560257
See? You're being pedantic with something that you don't even know. It specifically states you make effects with a duration become continuous. It even has modifiers for different durations, dude. I believe 1h/lv is base, 10 min/lv is 2x cost, 1 min/lv is 4x cost and 1 round/lv is 8x.

Stop arguing about rules you don't understand and read only half of.

>>52560353
By raw, here's what it says.

If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.

That said, something like cure light wounds has a duration of instantaneous, so you cannot make it use activated or continuous.

>>52560280
No. You have the CHANCE of finding items of that value in such town. In a smaller one you would have no chance.
But you don't get automatically that SPECIFIC item.
Is this kind of CharOpt mentality that spreaded meme about an already problematic game.

Partially related, this answer
>>52560353

>>52560427
Sorry, you can't make it use activated in a manner that it has infinite charges. potions are a thing, so what i said isn't technically correct.

>>52560427
Then wouldn't an infinite infernal healing wand cost only 8,000gp?

>>52560596
Unfortunately, yes.

Frankly, the magic item rules weren't as thoroughly tested as they should have been, by a long shot.

That said, an infinite charge on something that increases healing rate, and infinite charges on healing spells themselves are two entirely different beasts. No matter how many times you cast it, fast healing 1 is fast healing 1. Compared to 1d8+3(for the sake of argument) per turn, thats pretty damn bad. If you had a glove that did that, it would be fucking retardedly powerful.

>>52560714
Fast Healing 1 for 8,000gp is pretty nice. Now it's better to get it in celestial healing since you want to avoid detecting as evil.

>>52560783
Definitely true, but a wand with 50 charges of CLW and a wand of lesser vigor (also fast healing 1, but no alignment shift) from 3.5 are only 750 gold.

paying 7250 for an infinite version is a bit steep, honestly, until way higher levels, when you are gonna want the better versions anyways which will cost more.

>>52560827
The thing about a constant version is that it basically negates the need for healing your character out of combat so you can afford to take risks.

>>52560917
That also assumes you are given the opportunity to heal.

The more you are able to heal out of combat, the less a DM is likely to allow you to be out of combat.

>>52560962
That's retarded logic. So a person with a ring of regeneration magically attracts bandits, bears, and all kinds of monsters every 60 seconds?

>>52560999
Maybe. Depends on the environment. Sure, it won't happen in a town, after you got attacked in a back alley and beat their shit out. But in a dungeon? or the wild? any number of excuses can be made as to why you are still getting attacked.

>>52560999
At the level where you have the money for a Ring of Regeneration you'll likely have in excess of 110hp and be full of magical energy. Things are attracted to magical energy. The GM could also just say NO to your magic item bullshit.

>>52560596
The trick is that this typ[e of stupidity requires you to ignore the statement in the item creation rules that "certain types of items cannot be made using the systems in place without breaking them, so use the extant items as guidelines for the pricing of other items."

Yeah, they actually thought of shit like this and said "don't fucking let your idiot players get away with it". But that requires people to actually read things other than what they absolutely want, which is why so many munchkins exist.

>>52561063
Even a break of only 5 minutes could refresh your HP. Eventually either the forest will run out of creatures or the rest of the party will die.

>>52545463
Only because it was a thing for casters who could already do all that any way.

>>52561123
True enough, but there are also ways of dealing with it when not in combat, such as poisons, ability damage, and other crippling effects.

Sheer HP is not the only way to gimp a character, and a good DM should take advantage of it.

>>52545932
>it's only a problem with shitty GMs or munchkin players

So in other words, it's a problem with DnD. Got it, thanks.

>>52561284
Also a problem with GURPS, Dungeon World, 40k, Anima, Fate, Mutants and Masterminds, etc etc.

A bad group makes any system horrible.

>>52558450
Whoa there friend, that's a big assumption.

>>52561448
you mean that the players aren't mentally defective?

File: araragilean.gif (930KB, 448x252px) Image search: [Google]

930KB, 448x252px

>>52545053
It's fine. I just run 0 downtime games making it impossible to use.

Balanced!

>>52545053
Because there are a shit-ton of options that clearly weren't foreseen by the devs that break the game over your knee. Assuming we're talking about D&D, anyway.

>>52561284
In my experience, you are either a munchkin yourself or a whitefolfag

>>52545664
> the plot twist is that the land the players were in was Israel and every merchant NPC was Jewish

>>52558478
>I just found an absurdity the assumption that is easy to surprise monsters.
If you really want to be a fucker like this for no reason? Dire Tortoise shapechange. Now you *automatically* surprise everything, no save, nothing they can do about it. They surprise you? You turn that around and automatically surprise *them*.

And that's just because you're arbitrarily saying that it's hard to surprise enemies. It's not.

>>52562063
The moment you get shapechange, that is level 9, many enemies will be able to see through it because of items, spell likes, class features, buffs, racial abilities.

This is my main critic to many posts. When the levels raise, the ways the enemies can counter you increase, too.

>>52562163
It's not an illusion.

>>52562196
> "sees through illusions, and sees the true form of polymorphed, changed, or transmuted things".

ITT: people that consider wizards omnipotent because keep playing them wrong, along with the omnipresent Magic Item Amazon.com.

>>52562163
You can't counter Dire Tortoise giving you auto-surprise without a contingent Celerity or Time Stop or being a Dire Tortoise yourself. You don't get auto-surprise because they don't know what you are or anything, you get it because Dire Tortoises inherently automatically surprise everything.

>>52562163
sorry to say it, but >>52562312 is right.

Lightning Strike (Ex): A dire tortoise can lash out very rapidly. On the first round of combat, it gets a surprise round regardless of whether it has been noticed. A creature that notices the dire tortoise is still treated as flat-footed during this round.

There's no getting around it.

>>52562307
Which means... less than nothing, as you still have the physical qualities and supernatural attributes of whatever you're shapechanged into. Who fucking cares that they can see your true form? That doesn't stop you from physically being a dragon or a balor or whatever you want to be at the time.

Stop looking for chinks in the armor when you don't even know what you're dealing with in the first place.

>>52552169
5e likes to bill vanilla +1 weapons as absurdly and game breaking powerful. So much so that a player may only have one at the sufferance of the DM.
3rd and 4th editions were the only ones what considered a +1 to be trivial.

>>52562387
+1 to damage and hit a lot more in 5e since a adult black dragon has only 19 AC.

>>52562312
>>52562333
>>52562345
"This spell functions as beast shape III except that it also allows you to assume the form of a Tiny or Large creature of the magical beast type. If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: burrow 60 feet, climb 90 feet, fly 120 feet (good maneuverability), swim 120 feet, blindsense 60 feet, darkvision 90 feet, low-light vision, scent, tremorsense 60 feet, breath weapon, constrict, ferocity, grab, jet, poison, pounce, rake, rend, roar, spikes, trample, trip, and web. If the creature has immunity or resistance to any elements, you gain resistance 20 to those elements. If the creature has vulnerability to an element, you gain that vulnerability."

The fuck are you talking about

>>52562333
And since you've inherently got Shapechange on to be in that form and getting that ability anyways, you can start turning into other forms as soon as you get your action to start crapping out multiple spells per round, turn into forms that are immune to the biggest threat in the encounter, or any of a number of broken things.

>>52562423
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/shapechange.htm

This. It was disgustingly broken, very easily the most broken spell in the entire game when you factor in that it could let you freely cast Wish, get immunities nearly at-will, and fuck the action economy in the ass. It deserved every single nerf it got in PF.

>>52562504
OK GOT IT. I re-wrote the beast shape IV, on of the effects of PF's Shapechange.

Now I understand the butthurt. But why you people use that? Is one of the few things PF updated reasonably well.

>>52562535
Because PF didn't always exist.

Even in PF there's disgustingly broken shit that takes little effort to use. Go take a look at Dazing Spell and Sacred Geometry, then go look at a spreadsheet of monster stats by CR.

>>52545664
>Potion Seller, I'm going into battle and I need your strongest potions

>>52562600
Fine, but not need to be butthurt about Shapechange, that one is fine now.

I remember dazing spell. Is then that I realised that they are hacks and/or use underpaid designer wannabe.

>>52562639
I realized that during the alpha. It was pretty funny to see everyone gain the equivalent of a max rank skill every single level when they were using training early on, but then it got worse and worse and worse every single update. You have no idea how many times Rogues got fucked.

>>52560596
Boots of the Earth do the same thing for 5000gp.

http://archivesofnethys.com/MagicWondrousDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Boots%20of%20the%20Earth

>>52562694
You men concerning skills? I found they lost a niche.
They are less likely to meet enemies immune to SA in PF. Some people complained about the flasks.

>>52562728
That's part of the problem, but it's a combination of losing flasking for damage, tumble getting destroyed because it's an opposed check against CMD instead of a flat DC and making tumbling into a flank nearly impossible without major magic items buffing it, and losing things from 3.5 that were basically taxed features, like Darkstalker.

Sure, the PF Rogue looks like he's in a better position at a first glance, but they absolutely fucking suck compared to the Rogue that existed by the end of 3.5.

>>52562788
>Darkstalker
Ah, yes. Abomination book? Lord of Madness? But that was absolutely non-core, I cannot blame them. I would give that stuff and HipS to a rogue as a normal progression, don't get me wrong.

Get into position is not that terrible in a decently-sized group and/or with summons and pets. Also, a sensitive target could not necessarily have such high CMD. Even with big guysyou can try. A 3rd level rogue, unbuffed, needs a 8-9 to pass a CR3 ogre.
They did this CMD thing to help (with variable success depending on the level of play) the "tanks".

>>52563017
CMD scales faster than skills do unless you have a magic item to boost Tumble specifically. A CR 3 Ogre might have an easy to beat CMD at that level, but the average CMD for level 10 is 31. That's a jump in 13 over 7 levels. Tumble? You've got +8 or +9 to it over the same time frame without a specialized magic item for it or sinking a Skill Focus feat, both of which are wastes of time.

>>52562639
>not need to be butthurt about Shapechange
>anons kindly correcting your ignorance about rules is "butthurt"
wew kid

>>52563105
There is a better version for that. Now is time to complain about Dazing Spell, Shapechange is gone. Also, I am having a more interesting conversation.

>>52563097
A 10 level Rogue, I assume, will have enough Skill Points to fill 10 ranks. Then there is +3 (class skill) and at this point a probable +4 from dexterity.
I would not consider Skill Focus a waste in this case. Exactly at level 10, it would give another +6 for a needed roll of 8.
What I would do is just to craft/allow to craft as a DM a boot enchantment to boost Tumble.
But I see your point. Actually people complain of CMD because of maneuvers, but they are far easier to pull or optimise if you ignore the caveat of size modification (in 3.X, too it would have been a good deal of size -4 anyway).

>>52563241
>What I would do is just to craft/allow to craft as a DM a boot enchantment to boost Tumble.
Yeah, that's the problem. You shouldn't need to invest monetarily in something you should've been able to do by default, and in fact you didn't need to prior to PF. The only reason this is even the case is because Jason Bulmahn is a screaming manbaby and nerfed the shit out of Rogues during the playtesting phase.

>>52563313
I think is better to have a more solid frontline in the combat and have the rogue get its boots.
But yes, the class got the short end of the stick. Is the only one that did not impress my players back then and I conceded hips and to get poison use and trapfinding at the same moment.

>>52563357
The problem there isn't Tumble allowing you to get around the frontline - that limits you to a standard action anyways - it's that AoOs aren't enough of a carrot to keep people stuck in place against the melee. There's a reason you saw stuff like Thicket of Blades later in 3.5.

>GM: "Your rogue finds an Apparatus of the Crab!"

A what?

>GM: "It's like a really weak mech suit! It costs 100,000 GP! It is useless for your character!"

Ummm great.

>Wizard: "I crafted you a Shortsword of Subtlety. I would never find one of these lying around. It basically adds a +4 enhancement bonus to your broke ass shortsword style. It only cost me about 11,000 gp."

One of these is way better than

>>52563447
Aoos can be combined with trip by people with fats and/or reach.

>>52563241
>Also, I am having a more interesting conversation.
oh yes more and "different" proud ignorance of the rules and mechanics, how "interesting".

>>52563493
fine. now shut the fuck up.

>>52563500
>now shut the fuck up
I'll say whatever I want, faggot.

>>52563483
That necessitates a trip build, which... isn't all that great in PF. CMD goes apeshit, the typical tripping weapons are weaker, Flight immunizes you from being tripped...

>>52563447
Thicket of blade was too much idiot-proof for my tastes.

>>52563533
People forget that any bonus to hit goes to CMB.
And you don't need necessarily a feat build to trip.
A giant without improved trip and a guisarme has big area in which one cannot run through without being put on the ground.

>>52563518
If you want to keep complaining for shit fixed 8 years ago, go ahead. I will laugh a bit more.

>>52563557
Even still, you basically can't CMB anything big and beefy past level 15, even with a all-in CMB build.
CMD just scales too damn fast.

>>52563635
CMB and CMD?

>>52563811
Pathfailure made things like trip attempts into a special thing that basically boils down to an opposed attack roll that the defender takes 10 on (and adds their dex to) and that is modified by size.
You know who has the best attack bonuses? You know who has the best str+dex? You know who's bigger?
Team monster.

>>52563834
In 3.X you had cumulative -4 for each size of difference and you had no bonus from stuff pimping you attack roll. A fighter can have a +12 just with feats (wf, iwf, it, gt) and class features (wm) at high level ignoring BAB (+20) and strenght (easily a +10) and weapon enchant.
You can have a glaive with +47, better with temporary buffs and even gloves with true strike.
You can trip, enlarged, enemies up to huge.

Still they could have conceded more to high level martials (only monks can overcome size limits) and some the changes from 3.X are retarded (you used to be able to trip a flyer that used to fly with bio-mechanical means like wings). Now better deal damage and force a check.

>>52564146
The 3e method didn't work, but that doesn't mean the defunct PF method is good either.

>>52564185
You can try, at least. It enrages me more the size limits and the flyer changes. I would prefer an hybrid with some numeric adjustment.
But remember, you do not necessarily face the biggest guys - a group of lesser monsters would be raped.

Also, many big shots have resistances-immunities and have to roll a 1 to fail fortitude by then.

>>52545053
Because idiots hate the idea of putting limits on magic.

>>52545435
This guy gets it, when I craft a unique or trademark weapon, I draw it IRL and my group never notices the nuances in it.
>craft a flintlock pistol
>all metal on it is black (repurposed armor from our first boss)
>the ring around the barrel is brass (my late fathers ring)
>the name of it is a line from the bible
>the name is written in dwarvish which only 1 other party member speaks
It's like they just care about its stats and not its history or asthetic.

>>52568631
Well only good players care about stats

Duh.

>>52545053
Because it's a weird balancing issue based on what you make and how much down time you have. Just ask your GM if crafting is going to be a need in the game before making a character. If they say no just play a martial and have fun bashing heads.

>>52545053
A sword in real life would take like 7-8 days without power tools, therefore it's reasonable for a magical sword to take 10 days.

>>52569374
One of the material components for a +1 sword is a masterwork sword.

>>52569374
Making platemail usually takes MONTHS in real life yet it only takes less than a week to craft a set of +2 full plate.

>>52568631
How the fuck are they supposed to know any of that from a drawing of it?
Bad communication does not mean they don't care, it means you suck at letting them know.