The rest of the quotes removed since it's a lot of text and I'm only addressing this paragraph anyway.
I did mention, briefly "It's possible a DM can weave the necessary creature into a campaign seamlessly" but mentioning ahead of time also requires deciding in advance what item I'd like to create. This brings up the issue that by the time I have the downtime ready to craft I may no longer have any need for that item I decided on before acquiring the necessary item.
Further, the alternate order I proposed doesn't require creating a hard list of components. You can just take any relevant magical object in the scene or body part of a creature possibly made up on the spot, such as the whisker of a Water Weird. What's important is marking down the creature's CR (3 in this case) along with the item in your inventory. So that later on (possibly several sessions later) you have in your notes all of the information you need to potentially craft a thematically appropriate item without having to work out anything specific with your DM in advance other than "Hey, are you cool with us doing crafting in this campaign?" Then, run the actual item by your DM once you've come up with something. Then, take whatever other downtime steps are necessary to craft the item.
So don’t try to craft something you’re only situationally interested in. Being able to knock together the right tool for the job on the spot is the function of Artificers. Magic item crafting is a way to get at the items at the top of your wishlist; if you want to MacGuyver your way out of an active situation, you invoke the five sacred words “I’d like to try something”, take up your d20, and place your fate in the hands of RNGsus.
"Situational" is a vague and relative term. You make it look like I'm expecting to toss something together over a long rest. I'm not. I'm more of the concern that a ring of fire resistance will lose most of its necessary impact once we've moved past the volcano chapter of the story. It certainly won't be useless, but having to decide these things potentially months or years of real life time in advance is what I'm hoping to avoid having to do here.
Besides the "top of the wishlist" items are often way too high of a rarity to ever have a realistic chance of crafting in a campaign. Those are the kinds of things that require multiple months of downtime. I get that some tables might go for year long breaks of downtime between adventures or more, but it doesn't strike me as common at all. At best you get to make maybe one of them.
I'm more along the line of wanting to create consumable items like the Dust of Dryness. Or heck, even common magic items that have little impact on the game just to explore their eccentricities in play.
And yeah, I do prefer playing an Artificer. Exactly the kind of character who enjoys MacGuyvering things and spending an instance of Replicate Magic Item on a common magic item is a major waste of a class feature in most cases. So forgive me if I think having item crafting being at least somewhat conducive for an Artificer's style of play is not the absolute worst thing in the world to me.
The rest of the quotes removed since it's a lot of text and I'm only addressing this paragraph anyway.
I did mention, briefly "It's possible a DM can weave the necessary creature into a campaign seamlessly" but mentioning ahead of time also requires deciding in advance what item I'd like to create. This brings up the issue that by the time I have the downtime ready to craft I may no longer have any need for that item I decided on before acquiring the necessary item.
Further, the alternate order I proposed doesn't require creating a hard list of components. You can just take any relevant magical object in the scene or body part of a creature possibly made up on the spot, such as the whisker of a Water Weird. What's important is marking down the creature's CR (3 in this case) along with the item in your inventory. So that later on (possibly several sessions later) you have in your notes all of the information you need to potentially craft a thematically appropriate item without having to work out anything specific with your DM in advance other than "Hey, are you cool with us doing crafting in this campaign?" Then, run the actual item by your DM once you've come up with something. Then, take whatever other downtime steps are necessary to craft the item.
So don’t try to craft something you’re only situationally interested in. Being able to knock together the right tool for the job on the spot is the function of Artificers. Magic item crafting is a way to get at the items at the top of your wishlist; if you want to MacGuyver your way out of an active situation, you invoke the five sacred words “I’d like to try something”, take up your d20, and place your fate in the hands of RNGsus.
"Situational" is a vague and relative term. You make it look like I'm expecting to toss something together over a long rest. I'm not. I'm more of the concern that a ring of fire resistance will lose most of its necessary impact once we've moved past the volcano chapter of the story. It certainly won't be useless, but having to decide these things potentially months or years of real life time in advance is what I'm hoping to avoid having to do here.
Besides the "top of the wishlist" items are often way too high of a rarity to ever have a realistic chance of crafting in a campaign. Those are the kinds of things that require multiple months of downtime. I get that some tables might go for year long breaks of downtime between adventures or more, but it doesn't strike me as common at all. At best you get to make maybe one of them.
I'm more along the line of wanting to create consumable items like the Dust of Dryness. Or heck, even common magic items that have little impact on the game just to explore their eccentricities in play.
And yeah, I do prefer playing an Artificer. Exactly the kind of character who enjoys MacGuyvering things and spending an instance of Replicate Magic Item on a common magic item is a major waste of a class feature in most cases. So forgive me if I think having item crafting being at least somewhat conducive for an Artificer's style of play is not the absolute worst thing in the world to me.
Common magic items take a week, Uncommon two. Less if they’re consumable. That’s already easy to fit into anything that’s not a seat of your pants adventure. And again, my point about crafting is that it’s for stuff you intend to keep in service for long stretches, not to fill your inventory with a dozen “just in case” items like you’re playing a Bethesda game. Finally, when I said “top of your wishlist”, I assumed that “within reason for your current table” could go unspoken.
"Situational" is a vague and relative term. You make it look like I'm expecting to toss something together over a long rest. I'm not. I'm more of the concern that a ring of fire resistance will lose most of its necessary impact once we've moved past the volcano chapter of the story. It certainly won't be useless, but having to decide these things potentially months or years of real life time in advance is what I'm hoping to avoid having to do here.
Besides the "top of the wishlist" items are often way too high of a rarity to ever have a realistic chance of crafting in a campaign. Those are the kinds of things that require multiple months of downtime. I get that some tables might go for year long breaks of downtime between adventures or more, but it doesn't strike me as common at all. At best you get to make maybe one of them.
I'm more along the line of wanting to create consumable items like the Dust of Dryness. Or heck, even common magic items that have little impact on the game just to explore their eccentricities in play.
And yeah, I do prefer playing an Artificer. Exactly the kind of character who enjoys MacGuyvering things and spending an instance of Replicate Magic Item on a common magic item is a major waste of a class feature in most cases. So forgive me if I think having item crafting being at least somewhat conducive for an Artificer's style of play is not the absolute worst thing in the world to me.
Common magic items take a week, Uncommon two. Less if they’re consumable. That’s already easy to fit into anything that’s not a seat of your pants adventure. And again, my point about crafting is that it’s for stuff you intend to keep in service for long stretches, not to fill your inventory with a dozen “just in case” items like you’re playing a Bethesda game. Finally, when I said “top of your wishlist”, I assumed that “within reason for your current table” could go unspoken.
That's what you want out of crafting, sure, maybe even most people. I want something slightly different. Surely there's room enough in a crafting system to be amenable to more than just a single style of play, right?
Regardless, I don't exactly see what the problem is with deciding what you want to create after acquiring an exotic ingredient instead of deciding before you head off in an adventure to get one. Both require DM approval of what you would ostensibly craft and I'm not about to argue with a DM who says "No, this creature doesn't give you any exotic ingredients."
And it's not like you can't decide what kind of item you want to craft in advance of the adventure regardless, or that you can't communicate with your DM all the way throughout the process either.
I just wanted to describe a way to help crafting be as unobtrusive to everyone else playing as possible. If my proposed method doesn't do that then throw it out. I'm not married to it. My concerns (perhaps unwarranted) are about being considered the anchor on everyone else's progress because I like crafting.
Beyond that I really don't even know why we're arguing about this point...so I'm done.
The problem is that having already acquired the ingredients as blank plot coupons gives more of the expectation they can be turned in for whatever the player wants, shifting the dynamic of magic item distribution, which is meant to be firmly under the DM’s control. Deciding what you want first and then asking if the DM is amenable to working it in prevents false starts and undercuts munchkins who would try and browbeat a DM.
Thanks for clarifying. I can understand that concern. I suppose then, you hold the same opinion about using Bastion Points to acquire magic items? Because that's even more of a blank coupon than an exotic ingredient could be. An exotic ingredient doesn't doesn't nullify any other requirements after all, those requirements being the formula, the downtime and gold needed to craft.
The problem is that having already acquired the ingredients as blank plot coupons gives more of the expectation they can be turned in for whatever the player wants, shifting the dynamic of magic item distribution, which is meant to be firmly under the DM’s control. Deciding what you want first and then asking if the DM is amenable to working it in prevents false starts and undercuts munchkins who would try and browbeat a DM.
That still feels like something that can be done additionally though; the "blank plot coupon" is the simple base for groups that do want to allow any craftable item to be made, but an optional rule can easily add restrictions on top of that, for example, the need to develop/find a schematic for an item.
This can then either be used to formalise the "pick something first" method, or restrict what can then be made based upon which schematics the DM gives you access to. It's better to give the DM the pieces and let them choose how much or how little of them they need IMO.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Thanks for clarifying. I can understand that concern. I suppose then, you hold the same opinion about using Bastion Points to acquire magic items? Because that's even more of a blank coupon than an exotic ingredient could be. An exotic ingredient doesn't doesn't nullify any other requirements after all, those requirements being the formula, the downtime and gold needed to craft.
Bastion points have other uses, can only be redeemed on level up, have level pre-reqs baked in, and it's explicit that the DM has veto power. Letting players preemptively attempt to gather components just seems like it's asking for more bookkeeping and inviting more players to try to push the limits.
Thanks for clarifying. I can understand that concern. I suppose then, you hold the same opinion about using Bastion Points to acquire magic items? Because that's even more of a blank coupon than an exotic ingredient could be. An exotic ingredient doesn't doesn't nullify any other requirements after all, those requirements being the formula, the downtime and gold needed to craft.
Bastion points have other uses, can only be redeemed on level up, have level pre-reqs baked in, and it's explicit that the DM has veto power. Letting players preemptively attempt to gather components just seems like it's asking for more bookkeeping and inviting more players to try to push the limits.
Nothing people put in here is a fully fleshed out finished system. Any crafting system is going to have various requirements. Its not going to be hey, you can get any item in existence with this material you found. Most likely it would be teired based on level, or rarity, and still require DM buy in.
also book keeping is fine if, the people playing the game think its worthwhile. The official rules already consider the concept that beating some big boss will give you magic items, thats the way it works in the modules, and the way it works in the random tables. Its not crazy to suggest a crafting system utilize boss encounters.
look if a DM wants complete control, or doesnt want to use crafting, they dont have to. This thread is supposed to be about what type of systems people would want to see. Perhaps why they would want to see it. if your stance is there should be no crafting system, thats a bad start point for this engaging in this specfic thread
The problem is that having already acquired the ingredients as blank plot coupons gives more of the expectation they can be turned in for whatever the player wants, shifting the dynamic of magic item distribution, which is meant to be firmly under the DM’s control. Deciding what you want first and then asking if the DM is amenable to working it in prevents false starts and undercuts munchkins who would try and browbeat a DM.
If a DM chooses am optional crafting system, they likely are fine with players making choices on some level of item generation. One of the reasons people are asking for a crafting system is likely because to be 100% honest DMs overall are not good at meeting the needs or fantasies/fiction people want with respect to items. Which is not surprising because the guidance on How, What, and When its suggested to give people items is mostly vague, or hidden.
One of the best parts of a crafting system even existing, even if people dont use it, is it will probably contain some guidance on generally whats ok to give players, and when, and how much investment.
Thanks for clarifying. I can understand that concern. I suppose then, you hold the same opinion about using Bastion Points to acquire magic items? Because that's even more of a blank coupon than an exotic ingredient could be. An exotic ingredient doesn't doesn't nullify any other requirements after all, those requirements being the formula, the downtime and gold needed to craft.
Bastion points have other uses, can only be redeemed on level up, have level pre-reqs baked in, and it's explicit that the DM has veto power. Letting players preemptively attempt to gather components just seems like it's asking for more bookkeeping and inviting more players to try to push the limits.
I literally mentioned DMs having Veto power in the post I made. Now you're deliberately misrepresenting my thoughts. But it's clear I was never going to convince you of anything so I'll make no further attempts.
Magic items need costs, not just vague ranges, and rarity needs to be re-evaluated. There's a couple of good takes on magic item pricing out their - Sane Magic Item Pricing and MSRP (I forget how they broke down the acronym).
Limit crafting to Common through Rare items.
Define how magic item formula works and can be obtained. I currently run this similar to scrolls - they are scribed one-shot items. Artificers are the biggest source for these.
Make the time doable - if an item is going to take months upon months, it won't get made. A good use for Bastion facilities would be to speed up this process a bit. Off the top of my head, I'd suggest a base of 10 days for Common, 20 Days for Uncommon, and 40 days for Rare, halving that for consumables such as scrolls, potions, and formula.
Days vs months is not really a major obstacle when it comes to downtime- while a campaign is in an active phase you're unlikely to have 10 uninterrupted days of work, and typically by the time the DM is ready to give about 2 weeks worth of downtime, they're open to the amount currently given for a crafting project of rarity appropriate to the tier of play; plus you've actually doubled the crafting time required for Common and Uncommon items, relative to XGtE, and you've only got a 10-day difference on Rare (the crafting uses "workweeks" of 5-day increments).
Can someone explain why magic items need fixed prices, especially considering in my experience DM's will be rearranging the prices to suit their own tables in any case? Personally, I'd rather just see a few ranges I can roll for; it allows for the simulation of market forces and the non-standard nature of magic items (rarer ones are unlikely to have been recently produced, meaning they can't base the price on production costs).
Regarding the formulae, they're not supposed to be an actual checklist/instruction manual for the player; they're a gate/plot coupon the DM can use as a reward or adventure hook if they wish. As I already mentioned, seems like the best way to avoid making them a hassle is just to codify that common and uncommon ones can often be referenced without cost or difficulty, while higher rarities might require a payment or discovery.
Magic items need costs, not just vague ranges, and rarity needs to be re-evaluated. There's a couple of good takes on magic item pricing out their - Sane Magic Item Pricing and MSRP (I forget how they broke down the acronym).
Limit crafting to Common through Rare items.
Define how magic item formula works and can be obtained. I currently run this similar to scrolls - they are scribed one-shot items. Artificers are the biggest source for these.
Make the time doable - if an item is going to take months upon months, it won't get made. A good use for Bastion facilities would be to speed up this process a bit. Off the top of my head, I'd suggest a base of 10 days for Common, 20 Days for Uncommon, and 40 days for Rare, halving that for consumables such as scrolls, potions, and formula.
I agree with the pricing, revaluation of rarities, and the limit to common, uncommon, and rare magic items only.
The crafting time however is way too long. Xanathar’s has 1 workweek for common, 2 for uncommon, and 10 for rare.
As for the material component I am leaning towards gems of a certain value. Like a gem worth 100gp for common, 300gp for uncommon, and 500gp for rare.
Magic items need costs, not just vague ranges, and rarity needs to be re-evaluated. There's a couple of good takes on magic item pricing out their - Sane Magic Item Pricing and MSRP (I forget how they broke down the acronym).
Limit crafting to Common through Rare items.
Define how magic item formula works and can be obtained. I currently run this similar to scrolls - they are scribed one-shot items. Artificers are the biggest source for these.
Make the time doable - if an item is going to take months upon months, it won't get made. A good use for Bastion facilities would be to speed up this process a bit. Off the top of my head, I'd suggest a base of 10 days for Common, 20 Days for Uncommon, and 40 days for Rare, halving that for consumables such as scrolls, potions, and formula.
As for the material component I am leaning towards gems of a certain value. Like a gem worth 100gp for common, 300gp for uncommon, and 500gp for rare.
From a worldbuilding perspective, if something as relatively accessible as gemstones are all it takes, why are magic times so rare? I'd avoid codifying their components into something so simple and accessible purely on that basis, given the general theme of relative scarcity for magic items in D&D. Plus, if you're just going to make the components a fixed cost, there's no point in making that separate from the initial crafting cost.
The problem is that having already acquired the ingredients as blank plot coupons gives more of the expectation they can be turned in for whatever the player wants, shifting the dynamic of magic item distribution, which is meant to be firmly under the DM’s control. Deciding what you want first and then asking if the DM is amenable to working it in prevents false starts and undercuts munchkins who would try and browbeat a DM.
That still feels like something that can be done additionally though; the "blank plot coupon" is the simple base for groups that do want to allow any craftable item to be made, but an optional rule can easily add restrictions on top of that, for example, the need to develop/find a schematic for an item.
This can then either be used to formalise the "pick something first" method, or restrict what can then be made based upon which schematics the DM gives you access to. It's better to give the DM the pieces and let them choose how much or how little of them they need IMO.
I've thought about this a bit, and let me put it another way; if the players can preemptively gather components, then actually tracking the acquisition of components is essentially pointless. If the DM cares to regulate items by tier/level, then one can take as read that the players will have been through several appropriate encounters by the time they're ready to craft, and if all components are essentially wildcards to be used for any item at all, then assigning the acquisition to a particular encounter is arbitrary if not counterproductive to the idea that magic items require specialized components given that Basilisk eyes, Bearded Devil tendrils, and Displacer Beast hides are all apparently interchangeable components. Part of the point of calling for the DM to assign an encounter is to create a narrative opportunity around the crafting of the item. If that's not going to happen, trying to link the item to a particular encounter at all just seems like pointless bookkeeping, as well as undercutting the general sense of magic items being specially made if any of a couple dozen unrelated monster parts are equally usable in their construction.
if all components are essentially wildcards to be used for any item at all, then assigning the acquisition to a particular encounter is arbitrary if not counterproductive to the idea that magic items require specialized components given that Basilisk eyes, Bearded Devil tendrils, and Displacer Beast hides are all apparently interchangeable components.
The point is that specificity is something you can always add on top; the core system should be as simple as possible. Yes it might not be as exciting if your DM hands out "uncommon component" but some groups will be fine with that if the goal of crafting for them is just to be told when they pick an item to make. But a DM can absolutely still make that item specific if they want to, or an optional addition can make it matter.
What's key is that you can't simply make an uncommon item until your DM gives you the means to do so; if they want that item to be specified in advance then they can do so with a schematic for what you'll be making, and you go and get what you need (buying what you can, questing for what you can't).
But at the core of even that system what you have is schematic + [rarity] component, the DM can fill in as much specificity as they want, e.g- is that schematic for a weapon, +2 actually a chardalyn greataxe, and you're going to have to delve into a duergar camp to retrieve some of that rare material?
You don't need the crafting system to present a giant list of overly specific stuff, because that will only make it more intimidating to use; you just need the core mechanics to the actual doing of it, and some options for the DM in how to present and use it, and some good examples of how you do that and maybe some materials to offer for different rarities.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Magic items need costs, not just vague ranges, and rarity needs to be re-evaluated. There's a couple of good takes on magic item pricing out their - Sane Magic Item Pricing and MSRP (I forget how they broke down the acronym).
Limit crafting to Common through Rare items.
Define how magic item formula works and can be obtained. I currently run this similar to scrolls - they are scribed one-shot items. Artificers are the biggest source for these.
Make the time doable - if an item is going to take months upon months, it won't get made. A good use for Bastion facilities would be to speed up this process a bit. Off the top of my head, I'd suggest a base of 10 days for Common, 20 Days for Uncommon, and 40 days for Rare, halving that for consumables such as scrolls, potions, and formula.
As for the material component I am leaning towards gems of a certain value. Like a gem worth 100gp for common, 300gp for uncommon, and 500gp for rare.
From a worldbuilding perspective, if something as relatively accessible as gemstones are all it takes, why are magic times so rare? I'd avoid codifying their components into something so simple and accessible purely on that basis, given the general theme of relative scarcity for magic items in D&D. Plus, if you're just going to make the components a fixed cost, there's no point in making that separate from the initial crafting cost.
From a world building perspective a vast majority of NPCs will most likely never see a gem worth at least 100gp let alone more than a few gold pieces. And it would be easier for a DM to put some gems into the game then to decide what components would be thematically proper for each magic item. A DM already has a lot to do this would somewhat lessen the burden.
if all components are essentially wildcards to be used for any item at all, then assigning the acquisition to a particular encounter is arbitrary if not counterproductive to the idea that magic items require specialized components given that Basilisk eyes, Bearded Devil tendrils, and Displacer Beast hides are all apparently interchangeable components.
The point is that specificity is something you can always add on top; the core system should be as simple as possible. Yes it might not be as exciting if your DM hands out "uncommon component" but some groups will be fine with that if the goal of crafting for them is just to be told when they pick an item to make. But a DM can absolutely still make that item specific if they want to, or an optional addition can make it matter.
What's key is that you can't simply make an uncommon item until your DM gives you the means to do so; if they want that item to be specified in advance then can do so with a schematic for what you'll be making, and you go and get what you need (buying what you can, questing for what you can't).
But at the core of even that system what you have is schematic + [rarity] component, the DM can fill in as much specificity as they want, e.g- is that schematic for a weapon, +2 actually a chardalyn greataxe, and you're going to have to delve into a duergar camp to retrieve some of that rare material?
You don't need the crafting system to present a giant list of overly specific stuff, because that will only make it more intimidating to use; you just need the core mechanics to the actual doing of it, and some options for the DM in how to present and use it, and some good examples of how you do that and maybe some materials to offer for different rarities.
I'm not saying we need a big list of acceptable arrangements, but if the DM isn't going to specify a component and/or make a sidequest of getting ready to make the item, then there's no point in saying "oh, you picked up a Common magic item component in that last fight"; they can just let the players have purchased all the required materials with the gold cost. It's specifically the "I haven't decided what I want to make, but I want to have components" angle that seems unnecessary to the system itself and detrimental to the general worldbuilding of D&D.
Magic items need costs, not just vague ranges, and rarity needs to be re-evaluated. There's a couple of good takes on magic item pricing out their - Sane Magic Item Pricing and MSRP (I forget how they broke down the acronym).
Limit crafting to Common through Rare items.
Define how magic item formula works and can be obtained. I currently run this similar to scrolls - they are scribed one-shot items. Artificers are the biggest source for these.
Make the time doable - if an item is going to take months upon months, it won't get made. A good use for Bastion facilities would be to speed up this process a bit. Off the top of my head, I'd suggest a base of 10 days for Common, 20 Days for Uncommon, and 40 days for Rare, halving that for consumables such as scrolls, potions, and formula.
As for the material component I am leaning towards gems of a certain value. Like a gem worth 100gp for common, 300gp for uncommon, and 500gp for rare.
From a worldbuilding perspective, if something as relatively accessible as gemstones are all it takes, why are magic times so rare? I'd avoid codifying their components into something so simple and accessible purely on that basis, given the general theme of relative scarcity for magic items in D&D. Plus, if you're just going to make the components a fixed cost, there's no point in making that separate from the initial crafting cost.
From a world building perspective a vast majority of NPCs will most likely never see a gem worth at least 100gp let alone more than a few gold pieces. And it would be easier for a DM to put some gems into the game then to decide what components would be thematically proper for each magic item. A DM already has a lot to do this would somewhat lessen the burden.
If the DM doesn't want to bother with describing a specific component, they can just handwave it as "you buy the necessary materials" in the crafting cost. Making all magic items use a generic component just seems detrimental to D&D's overall worldbuilding as well as pointless from a system design perspective when there's already a cost factor.
Magic items need costs, not just vague ranges, and rarity needs to be re-evaluated. There's a couple of good takes on magic item pricing out their - Sane Magic Item Pricing and MSRP (I forget how they broke down the acronym).
Limit crafting to Common through Rare items.
Define how magic item formula works and can be obtained. I currently run this similar to scrolls - they are scribed one-shot items. Artificers are the biggest source for these.
Make the time doable - if an item is going to take months upon months, it won't get made. A good use for Bastion facilities would be to speed up this process a bit. Off the top of my head, I'd suggest a base of 10 days for Common, 20 Days for Uncommon, and 40 days for Rare, halving that for consumables such as scrolls, potions, and formula.
As for the material component I am leaning towards gems of a certain value. Like a gem worth 100gp for common, 300gp for uncommon, and 500gp for rare.
From a worldbuilding perspective, if something as relatively accessible as gemstones are all it takes, why are magic times so rare? I'd avoid codifying their components into something so simple and accessible purely on that basis, given the general theme of relative scarcity for magic items in D&D. Plus, if you're just going to make the components a fixed cost, there's no point in making that separate from the initial crafting cost.
From a world building perspective a vast majority of NPCs will most likely never see a gem worth at least 100gp let alone more than a few gold pieces. And it would be easier for a DM to put some gems into the game then to decide what components would be thematically proper for each magic item. A DM already has a lot to do this would somewhat lessen the burden.
That's an unsupportable answer: you cannot state what possibility or outcome may be in other world building situations and circumstances since you cannot predict or describe all possible world building circumstances.
In short, in that answer, you are placing limits on how other people can build their worlds. That is even if you meant to use a different terminology -- something other than "world building perspective". It is what you used.
Additionally, even in the current default game world for 5e -- The Forgotten Realms -- the majority of NPCs (who are characters that are played by a DM and often described in materials) not only commonly see such gems, they are the people that one takes those gems to in order to convert them to gold pieces. Indeed, you may be presuming that there is an equivalence in terms of rarity between Gems and Magic items -- yet we have no point of reference to establish that such is an actual equivalence (that the rarity of a gem is equal to the rarity of a magical item), and gems are one of the most common forms of treasure found in terms of established norms.
So, your attempt to provide a basis is limited to a very narrow scope and function -- i.e., your own world -- and not useful beyond that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
The problem is that having already acquired the ingredients as blank plot coupons gives more of the expectation they can be turned in for whatever the player wants, shifting the dynamic of magic item distribution, which is meant to be firmly under the DM’s control. Deciding what you want first and then asking if the DM is amenable to working it in prevents false starts and undercuts munchkins who would try and browbeat a DM.
This sounds like a major selling point, tbh, and not "the problem".
Adding magic item crafting with full player control increases player agency, and lets players actually get their hands on stuff that want, and not random stuff DM thinks are neat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
"Situational" is a vague and relative term. You make it look like I'm expecting to toss something together over a long rest. I'm not. I'm more of the concern that a ring of fire resistance will lose most of its necessary impact once we've moved past the volcano chapter of the story. It certainly won't be useless, but having to decide these things potentially months or years of real life time in advance is what I'm hoping to avoid having to do here.
Besides the "top of the wishlist" items are often way too high of a rarity to ever have a realistic chance of crafting in a campaign. Those are the kinds of things that require multiple months of downtime. I get that some tables might go for year long breaks of downtime between adventures or more, but it doesn't strike me as common at all. At best you get to make maybe one of them.
I'm more along the line of wanting to create consumable items like the Dust of Dryness. Or heck, even common magic items that have little impact on the game just to explore their eccentricities in play.
And yeah, I do prefer playing an Artificer. Exactly the kind of character who enjoys MacGuyvering things and spending an instance of Replicate Magic Item on a common magic item is a major waste of a class feature in most cases. So forgive me if I think having item crafting being at least somewhat conducive for an Artificer's style of play is not the absolute worst thing in the world to me.
Common magic items take a week, Uncommon two. Less if they’re consumable. That’s already easy to fit into anything that’s not a seat of your pants adventure. And again, my point about crafting is that it’s for stuff you intend to keep in service for long stretches, not to fill your inventory with a dozen “just in case” items like you’re playing a Bethesda game. Finally, when I said “top of your wishlist”, I assumed that “within reason for your current table” could go unspoken.
That's what you want out of crafting, sure, maybe even most people. I want something slightly different. Surely there's room enough in a crafting system to be amenable to more than just a single style of play, right?
Regardless, I don't exactly see what the problem is with deciding what you want to create after acquiring an exotic ingredient instead of deciding before you head off in an adventure to get one. Both require DM approval of what you would ostensibly craft and I'm not about to argue with a DM who says "No, this creature doesn't give you any exotic ingredients."
And it's not like you can't decide what kind of item you want to craft in advance of the adventure regardless, or that you can't communicate with your DM all the way throughout the process either.
I just wanted to describe a way to help crafting be as unobtrusive to everyone else playing as possible. If my proposed method doesn't do that then throw it out. I'm not married to it. My concerns (perhaps unwarranted) are about being considered the anchor on everyone else's progress because I like crafting.
Beyond that I really don't even know why we're arguing about this point...so I'm done.
The problem is that having already acquired the ingredients as blank plot coupons gives more of the expectation they can be turned in for whatever the player wants, shifting the dynamic of magic item distribution, which is meant to be firmly under the DM’s control. Deciding what you want first and then asking if the DM is amenable to working it in prevents false starts and undercuts munchkins who would try and browbeat a DM.
Thanks for clarifying. I can understand that concern. I suppose then, you hold the same opinion about using Bastion Points to acquire magic items? Because that's even more of a blank coupon than an exotic ingredient could be. An exotic ingredient doesn't doesn't nullify any other requirements after all, those requirements being the formula, the downtime and gold needed to craft.
That still feels like something that can be done additionally though; the "blank plot coupon" is the simple base for groups that do want to allow any craftable item to be made, but an optional rule can easily add restrictions on top of that, for example, the need to develop/find a schematic for an item.
This can then either be used to formalise the "pick something first" method, or restrict what can then be made based upon which schematics the DM gives you access to. It's better to give the DM the pieces and let them choose how much or how little of them they need IMO.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Bastion points have other uses, can only be redeemed on level up, have level pre-reqs baked in, and it's explicit that the DM has veto power. Letting players preemptively attempt to gather components just seems like it's asking for more bookkeeping and inviting more players to try to push the limits.
Nothing people put in here is a fully fleshed out finished system. Any crafting system is going to have various requirements. Its not going to be hey, you can get any item in existence with this material you found. Most likely it would be teired based on level, or rarity, and still require DM buy in.
also book keeping is fine if, the people playing the game think its worthwhile. The official rules already consider the concept that beating some big boss will give you magic items, thats the way it works in the modules, and the way it works in the random tables. Its not crazy to suggest a crafting system utilize boss encounters.
look if a DM wants complete control, or doesnt want to use crafting, they dont have to. This thread is supposed to be about what type of systems people would want to see. Perhaps why they would want to see it. if your stance is there should be no crafting system, thats a bad start point for this engaging in this specfic thread
If a DM chooses am optional crafting system, they likely are fine with players making choices on some level of item generation. One of the reasons people are asking for a crafting system is likely because to be 100% honest DMs overall are not good at meeting the needs or fantasies/fiction people want with respect to items. Which is not surprising because the guidance on How, What, and When its suggested to give people items is mostly vague, or hidden.
One of the best parts of a crafting system even existing, even if people dont use it, is it will probably contain some guidance on generally whats ok to give players, and when, and how much investment.
I literally mentioned DMs having Veto power in the post I made. Now you're deliberately misrepresenting my thoughts. But it's clear I was never going to convince you of anything so I'll make no further attempts.
Magic items need costs, not just vague ranges, and rarity needs to be re-evaluated. There's a couple of good takes on magic item pricing out their - Sane Magic Item Pricing and MSRP (I forget how they broke down the acronym).
Limit crafting to Common through Rare items.
Define how magic item formula works and can be obtained. I currently run this similar to scrolls - they are scribed one-shot items. Artificers are the biggest source for these.
Make the time doable - if an item is going to take months upon months, it won't get made. A good use for Bastion facilities would be to speed up this process a bit. Off the top of my head, I'd suggest a base of 10 days for Common, 20 Days for Uncommon, and 40 days for Rare, halving that for consumables such as scrolls, potions, and formula.
Check out my books on Amazon - Jon R. Osborne
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-YXqOMcVirc
Days vs months is not really a major obstacle when it comes to downtime- while a campaign is in an active phase you're unlikely to have 10 uninterrupted days of work, and typically by the time the DM is ready to give about 2 weeks worth of downtime, they're open to the amount currently given for a crafting project of rarity appropriate to the tier of play; plus you've actually doubled the crafting time required for Common and Uncommon items, relative to XGtE, and you've only got a 10-day difference on Rare (the crafting uses "workweeks" of 5-day increments).
Can someone explain why magic items need fixed prices, especially considering in my experience DM's will be rearranging the prices to suit their own tables in any case? Personally, I'd rather just see a few ranges I can roll for; it allows for the simulation of market forces and the non-standard nature of magic items (rarer ones are unlikely to have been recently produced, meaning they can't base the price on production costs).
Regarding the formulae, they're not supposed to be an actual checklist/instruction manual for the player; they're a gate/plot coupon the DM can use as a reward or adventure hook if they wish. As I already mentioned, seems like the best way to avoid making them a hassle is just to codify that common and uncommon ones can often be referenced without cost or difficulty, while higher rarities might require a payment or discovery.
I agree with the pricing, revaluation of rarities, and the limit to common, uncommon, and rare magic items only.
The crafting time however is way too long. Xanathar’s has 1 workweek for common, 2 for uncommon, and 10 for rare.
As for the material component I am leaning towards gems of a certain value. Like a gem worth 100gp for common, 300gp for uncommon, and 500gp for rare.
From a worldbuilding perspective, if something as relatively accessible as gemstones are all it takes, why are magic times so rare? I'd avoid codifying their components into something so simple and accessible purely on that basis, given the general theme of relative scarcity for magic items in D&D. Plus, if you're just going to make the components a fixed cost, there's no point in making that separate from the initial crafting cost.
I've thought about this a bit, and let me put it another way; if the players can preemptively gather components, then actually tracking the acquisition of components is essentially pointless. If the DM cares to regulate items by tier/level, then one can take as read that the players will have been through several appropriate encounters by the time they're ready to craft, and if all components are essentially wildcards to be used for any item at all, then assigning the acquisition to a particular encounter is arbitrary if not counterproductive to the idea that magic items require specialized components given that Basilisk eyes, Bearded Devil tendrils, and Displacer Beast hides are all apparently interchangeable components. Part of the point of calling for the DM to assign an encounter is to create a narrative opportunity around the crafting of the item. If that's not going to happen, trying to link the item to a particular encounter at all just seems like pointless bookkeeping, as well as undercutting the general sense of magic items being specially made if any of a couple dozen unrelated monster parts are equally usable in their construction.
The point is that specificity is something you can always add on top; the core system should be as simple as possible. Yes it might not be as exciting if your DM hands out "uncommon component" but some groups will be fine with that if the goal of crafting for them is just to be told when they pick an item to make. But a DM can absolutely still make that item specific if they want to, or an optional addition can make it matter.
What's key is that you can't simply make an uncommon item until your DM gives you the means to do so; if they want that item to be specified in advance then they can do so with a schematic for what you'll be making, and you go and get what you need (buying what you can, questing for what you can't).
But at the core of even that system what you have is schematic + [rarity] component, the DM can fill in as much specificity as they want, e.g- is that schematic for a weapon, +2 actually a chardalyn greataxe, and you're going to have to delve into a duergar camp to retrieve some of that rare material?
You don't need the crafting system to present a giant list of overly specific stuff, because that will only make it more intimidating to use; you just need the core mechanics to the actual doing of it, and some options for the DM in how to present and use it, and some good examples of how you do that and maybe some materials to offer for different rarities.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
From a world building perspective a vast majority of NPCs will most likely never see a gem worth at least 100gp let alone more than a few gold pieces. And it would be easier for a DM to put some gems into the game then to decide what components would be thematically proper for each magic item. A DM already has a lot to do this would somewhat lessen the burden.
I'm not saying we need a big list of acceptable arrangements, but if the DM isn't going to specify a component and/or make a sidequest of getting ready to make the item, then there's no point in saying "oh, you picked up a Common magic item component in that last fight"; they can just let the players have purchased all the required materials with the gold cost. It's specifically the "I haven't decided what I want to make, but I want to have components" angle that seems unnecessary to the system itself and detrimental to the general worldbuilding of D&D.
If the DM doesn't want to bother with describing a specific component, they can just handwave it as "you buy the necessary materials" in the crafting cost. Making all magic items use a generic component just seems detrimental to D&D's overall worldbuilding as well as pointless from a system design perspective when there's already a cost factor.
That's an unsupportable answer: you cannot state what possibility or outcome may be in other world building situations and circumstances since you cannot predict or describe all possible world building circumstances.
In short, in that answer, you are placing limits on how other people can build their worlds. That is even if you meant to use a different terminology -- something other than "world building perspective". It is what you used.
Additionally, even in the current default game world for 5e -- The Forgotten Realms -- the majority of NPCs (who are characters that are played by a DM and often described in materials) not only commonly see such gems, they are the people that one takes those gems to in order to convert them to gold pieces. Indeed, you may be presuming that there is an equivalence in terms of rarity between Gems and Magic items -- yet we have no point of reference to establish that such is an actual equivalence (that the rarity of a gem is equal to the rarity of a magical item), and gems are one of the most common forms of treasure found in terms of established norms.
So, your attempt to provide a basis is limited to a very narrow scope and function -- i.e., your own world -- and not useful beyond that.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
This sounds like a major selling point, tbh, and not "the problem".
Adding magic item crafting with full player control increases player agency, and lets players actually get their hands on stuff that want, and not random stuff DM thinks are neat.