# Dumb Crafting Questions...

Tags:
Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous

Not being very good at optimising builds (nor the statistics necessary
to figure out the average cost of failed checks), I figured I'd ask
here instead of making some stupid mistake and messing up my numbers.
My question is this: What level would an NPC (but could have character
levels) need to be to have a better than 50/50 chance of succeeding at
creating an item with a Craft DC of 100? what about an item with a
craft DC of 200? How much higher level do they need to be to succed
more than 75% of the time? The NPC would have access to any necessary
enhancement magic, even if it would not normally be available for his
level due to cost (+5 stat boosters, etc...)

How long (on average) would it take, and what would it cost? The value
of the item would be 100,000 gp, so materials should be 33,333 gp, and
it takes 10 weeks if there are no failures, right? I know that a check
failed by 5 or more means you have to pay an additional half the
materials cost, but how many failures of 5 or more can I expect? How
many failures of 4 or less (which increase time, but not cost)?

I'd also really appreciate a good explanation of how you calculate the
numbers, particularly the statistics part. I'm good at math, but never
took a statistics course, and I'm not sure my understanding of
probability is up to the task.
Anonymous

>snip<

First and absolute foremost. Remember that you can take 10, so a 50/50
chance is all you need.
Anonymous

I don't quite understand your point. Take 10 means that with a +90
skill bonus, I succeed every time. So I guess my first question boils
down to what skill bonus do I need to succeed 50% of the time, and what
level can a perfectly specialised NPC be expected to have that bonus?
Of course, then I need to figure out the same answers for a +190 bonus.
Are you implying that anything less than +90 is effectively useless?
Related resources

"Pythor" <pythor@gmail.com> wrote in message
> Not being very good at optimising builds (nor the statistics necessary
> to figure out the average cost of failed checks),

Unfortunately, it becomes a build question in a way...how do you get the
necessary skill modifier? See below.

> here instead of making some stupid mistake and messing up my numbers.
> My question is this: What level would an NPC (but could have character
> levels) need to be to have a better than 50/50 chance of succeeding at
> creating an item with a Craft DC of 100?

It's not the level, per se, but the skill modifier in Craft. Given infinite
time and resources, she has 100% chance of success to create the item with
Craft +80. She has 0% chance with Craft +79. Both craft numbers can
include whatever modifiers for ability, tools, circumstance, etc. that you
want. I'll leave it to someone else to work out a build that will get to
that skill modifier (this is where the build comes in again). Add 10 levels
to get to Craft +90, as I'm pretty certain that the modifiers will run out
early. Ooh..don't forget divinations spells to boost that modifier..I guess
Guidance is good for something.

If you remove the infinite time and infinite resources, the minimum craft
needs to rise in order to reach Craft +90, at which point, taking 10 will
give you 100% chance of success. Even Craft+89 becomes resource constrained
fairly quickly...an 11 makes progress, but 1-6 costs you half of your
resource cost again (16,667gp cost 30% likely). Effectively, at a very
best, you have to make between 9 and 17 positive checks (this varies based
upon the value of your skill check) before getting a failure. Simplifying
in order to demonstrate through absurdity, the chance of avoiding a
catostrophic failure in even 9 concecutive rolls (which does not guarantee
successful completion..you might have some non-progress days) is (1/2)^9, or
a chance of roughly 0.2%, well under your 50% figure...and this is assuming
that you got the 83 checks prior to get here, even if backsliding from time
to time. Note that to require only 9 chances, you would need 9 20s. We'll
drop it there, as the 50% figure was enough of a threshold.

So, basically you need Craft +90 to have any meaningful chance of success,
at which point the success becomes 100% likely via take 10. Note that you
can't take 20 because there is a consequence to failure.

>what about an item with a
> craft DC of 200?

This is the same question: 100% at Craft +180/190 and 0% at Craft +179/189.

>How much higher level do they need to be to succed
> more than 75% of the time? The NPC would have access to any necessary
> enhancement magic, even if it would not normally be available for his
> level due to cost (+5 stat boosters, etc...)

None. It's either very small chance (astronomically small) or 100%.

>
> How long (on average) would it take, and what would it cost? The value
> of the item would be 100,000 gp, so materials should be 33,333 gp, and
> it takes 10 weeks if there are no failures, right?

Not right. You may have missed that progress is measured in silver pieces,
not gold. The crafter makes a given amount of progress per week of trying.
If successful, that progress is the product of the DC and the skill check.
Assuming he takes 10 to get his skill check, the progress is (100)*(100)
silver pieces per week =10,000sp or 1,000gp. A 100,000gp item would then
take 100 weeks. If he can throw down better skill checks, he can progress
faster. For example, if he has Craft +100, he can take 10, opt to increase
the DC to 110, and make (110)*(110) progress, or 1,210 gp progress per week.

The cost of the item is not tied to the DC. You could have an item that had
a cost of 1cp and a DC of 100. See the step by step under craft...pay
attention to those things listed as being determined by the DM.

>I know that a check
> failed by 5 or more means you have to pay an additional half the
> materials cost, but how many failures of 5 or more can I expect? How
> many failures of 4 or less (which increase time, but not cost)?

None. Take 10.

>
> I'd also really appreciate a good explanation of how you calculate the
> numbers, particularly the statistics part. I'm good at math, but never
> took a statistics course, and I'm not sure my understanding of
> probability is up to the task.

There is a statistical process that can be used to calculate the chance of
success without failure, or the average cost, etc. All would be a function
of the Craft modifier, the DC, and the cost; it is essentially meaningles
for the item you have described I'll get you some numbers for an item that
costs 5,000gp if DC 100 if Craft +89 as a reference point for you.

>

David

--
Anonymous

Pythor wrote:
> I don't quite understand your point. Take 10 means that with a +90
> skill bonus, I succeed every time. So I guess my first question boils
> down to what skill bonus do I need to succeed 50% of the time, and what
> level can a perfectly specialised NPC be expected to have that bonus?
> Of course, then I need to figure out the same answers for a +190 bonus.
> Are you implying that anything less than +90 is effectively useless?
> Can you explain your reasoning?

It sounds like you don't have much of a handle on the craft system. I'd
suggest reading through the craft skill a few times. There's nothing
that has a DC of 100 anyway, The highest DC is for alchemical items at
DC 25. Although you can voluntarily increase the DC in increments of
10, which allows you to complete things faster.

There is no such check that allows you to succeed 50% of the time.
Either you can do it or you can't. It'll just take you a hell of a lot
longer and cost you a hell of a lot more if you can't take 10.

First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
complete a 100,000 gp item.

If you don't have enough skill to take 10, lets go with the most
extreme example: You have a skill of +80, this means you only succeed
on a DC 100 check when you roll a 20, or 5% of the time. This means it
is going to take you 20x as long, or 2000 weeks or 40 years. We also
need to consider one other thing, which is it costs you 1/2 of the base
materials cost every time you fail by 5 or more. the base materials
cost is 1/3 of the end value of the time, so for a 100,000 gp item it
would be 33,333 gp so every time you fail by 5 or more you cost
yourself 16,666 gp. Since you fail by 5 or more 75% of the time it's
going to cost you an average of 24,999,000 gp to create that 100,000 gp
item, where the person who has a +90 it cost him 33,000 gp.

So the person with a +80 still can make it 100% of the time, it just
takes him a lot longer and costs him a lot more. Whereas a character
with +79 can't make it at all, since he never succeeds on a check.

But since the highest craft DC is 25, you only need a skill of +15 to
make sure you can make anything in your craft. Increasing your skill
only allows you to make things faster.

- Justisaur
Anonymous

Justisaur wrote:
> Pythor wrote:
> > I don't quite understand your point. Take 10 means that with a +90
> > skill bonus, I succeed every time. So I guess my first question boils
> > down to what skill bonus do I need to succeed 50% of the time, and what
> > level can a perfectly specialised NPC be expected to have that bonus?
> > Of course, then I need to figure out the same answers for a +190 bonus.
> > Are you implying that anything less than +90 is effectively useless?
> > Can you explain your reasoning?
>
> It sounds like you don't have much of a handle on the craft system. I'd
> suggest reading through the craft skill a few times. There's nothing
> that has a DC of 100 anyway, The highest DC is for alchemical items at
> DC 25. Although you can voluntarily increase the DC in increments of
> 10, which allows you to complete things faster.
>
> There is no such check that allows you to succeed 50% of the time.
> Either you can do it or you can't. It'll just take you a hell of a lot
> longer and cost you a hell of a lot more if you can't take 10.
>
> First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
> crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
> result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
> a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
> a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
> complete a 100,000 gp item.
>
> If you don't have enough skill to take 10, lets go with the most
> extreme example: You have a skill of +80, this means you only succeed
> on a DC 100 check when you roll a 20, or 5% of the time. This means it
> is going to take you 20x as long, or 2000 weeks or 40 years. We also
> need to consider one other thing, which is it costs you 1/2 of the base
> materials cost every time you fail by 5 or more. the base materials
> cost is 1/3 of the end value of the time, so for a 100,000 gp item it
> would be 33,333 gp so every time you fail by 5 or more you cost
> yourself 16,666 gp. Since you fail by 5 or more 75% of the time it's
> going to cost you an average of 24,999,000 gp to create that 100,000 gp
> item, where the person who has a +90 it cost him 33,000 gp.
>
> So the person with a +80 still can make it 100% of the time, it just
> takes him a lot longer and costs him a lot more. Whereas a character
> with +79 can't make it at all, since he never succeeds on a check.
>
> But since the highest craft DC is 25, you only need a skill of +15 to
> make sure you can make anything in your craft. Increasing your skill
> only allows you to make things faster.
Is this a cap according to the rules? or just the largest DC that
is given in an example. I'm trying to figure the math on a system of
making items that are greater than masterwork items, in that they are
more expensive to produce, but are cheaper to add enhancements to. I
want the whole thing to balance roughly with the normal magic item
creation rules, so a +10 enhancement item is 100,000 gp (with the other
100,000 paid by enchanter.) Perhaps a DC of 100 is too high, but I
really need to understand the logic here to be able to get a decent
balance of Crafter skill required vs. the savings in the enchantment
process.
I see your point that failure isn't really an option, though I
guess what I meant was where exceeding the actuall cost of buying the
item was a failure.
Let me explain: I want to create an alternate system for magic item
creation based loosely on the way computer RPGS often do it. You have
to have an item of a particular quality in order for it to accept
enchantments. Each enchantment takes up "space" on the item, which I
am going to say is a single rune. A higher DC allows you to create an
item that can accept more runes. I figured enhancement squared equals
number of runes needed, and DC = number of Runes, so a +5 Vorpal
won't work. Maybe some geometric sequence, instead of squaring will
lead to better numbers. Or maybe I need to rethink the whole thing.
Either way, thank you for explaining the logic you used. I think
I have a decent handle on the the crafting concept, though I didn't
realise that making the cost so high would create an absurd problem in
the time line. I also forgot to convert gp to sp, so that's where I
got 10 weeks instead of 100. I'd still like to find out what level of
NPC would be needed to pull of those +90 skill checks.

--
"Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> Pythor wrote:
>> I don't quite understand your point. Take 10 means that with a +90
>> skill bonus, I succeed every time. So I guess my first question boils
>> down to what skill bonus do I need to succeed 50% of the time, and what
>> level can a perfectly specialised NPC be expected to have that bonus?
>> Of course, then I need to figure out the same answers for a +190 bonus.
>> Are you implying that anything less than +90 is effectively useless?
>> Can you explain your reasoning?
>
> It sounds like you don't have much of a handle on the craft system. I'd
> suggest reading through the craft skill a few times. There's nothing
> that has a DC of 100 anyway, The highest DC is for alchemical items at
> DC 25. Although you can voluntarily increase the DC in increments of
> 10, which allows you to complete things faster.

Not quite true. The table gives examples that go to DC25. The DM could
assign a higher DC to more difficult tasks, the maximum is essentially
unlimited.

>
> There is no such check that allows you to succeed 50% of the time.
> Either you can do it or you can't. It'll just take you a hell of a lot
> longer and cost you a hell of a lot more if you can't take 10.

There is such a series of checks, just not given the parameters provided.
For example, a reasonable question about crafting and a percentage success
is something like, "What is the minimum craft required to have a 50%
liklihood of success for an item with DC x, that costs y xp, must be
completed with a limit of either w gp or v weeks of construction."

>
> First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
> crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
> result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
> a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
> a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
> complete a 100,000 gp item.

This is correct.

>
> If you don't have enough skill to take 10, lets go with the most
> extreme example: You have a skill of +80, this means you only succeed
> on a DC 100 check when you roll a 20, or 5% of the time. This means it
> is going to take you 20x as long, or 2000 weeks or 40 years.

Not exactly true. There is a very small chance of getting 100 20s in a row,
for example The chance is (.05)^100. Likewise, there is a chance that you
get 99 right, miss in one week (either costing more materials or not), and
then succeed in week 101. This kind of possibility is what OP was asking
about, I think. However, for the case given by the original poster, the law
of large numbers kicks in, and it will have a tendency to get results close
to what you have suggested.

>We also
> need to consider one other thing, which is it costs you 1/2 of the base
> materials cost every time you fail by 5 or more. the base materials
> cost is 1/3 of the end value of the time, so for a 100,000 gp item it
> would be 33,333 gp so every time you fail by 5 or more you cost
> yourself 16,666 gp. Since you fail by 5 or more 75% of the time it's
> going to cost you an average of 24,999,000 gp to create that 100,000 gp
> item, where the person who has a +90 it cost him 33,000 gp.

Again, there is a distribution to how likely you are to fail by 5 or more,
multiple times. Your answer is pretty close to correct when dealing with
these large numbers, don't get me wrong. There is the rare chance that you
could fail multiple times to make progress, but never screw up the project
such that you had to bring in more materials. While this is a miniscule
chance with the parameters given, it is not so far off for smaller items.
For example, there is about a 3% chance of making a 5,000gp item that has a
DC100 with Craft+89 in 5 weeks time (.5^5).

>
> So the person with a +80 still can make it 100% of the time, it just
> takes him a lot longer and costs him a lot more. Whereas a character
> with +79 can't make it at all, since he never succeeds on a check.

Yep.
>
> But since the highest craft DC is 25, you only need a skill of +15 to
> make sure you can make anything in your craft. Increasing your skill
> only allows you to make things faster.

Nope. Again, the chart is for examples only, and the DM might assign a
higher DC value.

David

> If you remove the infinite time and infinite resources, the minimum craft
> needs to rise in order to reach Craft +90, at which point, taking 10 will
> give you 100% chance of success. Even Craft+89 becomes resource
> constrained fairly quickly...an 11 makes progress, but 1-6 costs you half
> of your resource cost again (16,667gp cost 30% likely). Effectively, at a
> very best, you have to make between 9 and 17 positive checks (this varies
> based upon the value of your skill check) before getting a failure.
> Simplifying in order to demonstrate through absurdity, the chance of
> avoiding a catostrophic failure in even 9 concecutive rolls (which does
> not guarantee successful completion..you might have some non-progress
> days) is (1/2)^9, or a chance of roughly 0.2%, well under your 50%
> figure...and this is assuming that you got the 83 checks prior to get
> here, even if backsliding from time to time. Note that to require only 9
> chances, you would need 9 20s. We'll drop it there, as the 50% figure was
> enough of a threshold.

Responding to my own post: The above had an error. I was thinking that
failure that ruined materials also resulted in an extended time rather than
just an increased cost.

--
Anonymous

David wrote:
> --
> "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > Pythor wrote:
> >> I don't quite understand your point. Take 10 means that with a +90
> >> skill bonus, I succeed every time. So I guess my first question boils
> >> down to what skill bonus do I need to succeed 50% of the time, and what
> >> level can a perfectly specialised NPC be expected to have that bonus?
> >> Of course, then I need to figure out the same answers for a +190 bonus.
> >> Are you implying that anything less than +90 is effectively useless?
> >> Can you explain your reasoning?
> >
> > It sounds like you don't have much of a handle on the craft system. I'd
> > suggest reading through the craft skill a few times. There's nothing
> > that has a DC of 100 anyway, The highest DC is for alchemical items at
> > DC 25. Although you can voluntarily increase the DC in increments of
> > 10, which allows you to complete things faster.
>
> Not quite true. The table gives examples that go to DC25. The DM could
> assign a higher DC to more difficult tasks, the maximum is essentially
> unlimited.
>

That's what I thought. Still, I'm not sure if a DC 100 is feasible,
given the numbers.
> >
> > There is no such check that allows you to succeed 50% of the time.
> > Either you can do it or you can't. It'll just take you a hell of a lot
> > longer and cost you a hell of a lot more if you can't take 10.
>
> There is such a series of checks, just not given the parameters provided.
> For example, a reasonable question about crafting and a percentage success
> is something like, "What is the minimum craft required to have a 50%
> liklihood of success for an item with DC x, that costs y xp, must be
> completed with a limit of either w gp or v weeks of construction."
>
Which I guess I need to look at. Was this a typo, though? Did you
mean y gp, or are you really saying y xp? The cost is, in fact 100,000
gp. The DC is negotiable, v is negotiable (though I wanted something
on the order of months, and not years) and w is likely to be 50,000 gp
(1/2 y, if y is gp).
>
> >
> > First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
> > crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
> > result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
> > a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
> > a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
> > complete a 100,000 gp item.
>
> This is correct.
>
> >
> > If you don't have enough skill to take 10, lets go with the most
> > extreme example: You have a skill of +80, this means you only succeed
> > on a DC 100 check when you roll a 20, or 5% of the time. This means it
> > is going to take you 20x as long, or 2000 weeks or 40 years.
>
> Not exactly true. There is a very small chance of getting 100 20s in a row,
> for example The chance is (.05)^100. Likewise, there is a chance that you
> get 99 right, miss in one week (either costing more materials or not), and
> then succeed in week 101. This kind of possibility is what OP was asking
> about, I think. However, for the case given by the original poster, the law
> of large numbers kicks in, and it will have a tendency to get results close
> to what you have suggested.
>
> >We also
> > need to consider one other thing, which is it costs you 1/2 of the base
> > materials cost every time you fail by 5 or more. the base materials
> > cost is 1/3 of the end value of the time, so for a 100,000 gp item it
> > would be 33,333 gp so every time you fail by 5 or more you cost
> > yourself 16,666 gp. Since you fail by 5 or more 75% of the time it's
> > going to cost you an average of 24,999,000 gp to create that 100,000 gp
> > item, where the person who has a +90 it cost him 33,000 gp.
>
> Again, there is a distribution to how likely you are to fail by 5 or more,
> multiple times. Your answer is pretty close to correct when dealing with
> these large numbers, don't get me wrong. There is the rare chance that you
> could fail multiple times to make progress, but never screw up the project
> such that you had to bring in more materials. While this is a miniscule
> chance with the parameters given, it is not so far off for smaller items.
> For example, there is about a 3% chance of making a 5,000gp item that has a
> DC100 with Craft+89 in 5 weeks time (.5^5).
>
>
>
> >
> > So the person with a +80 still can make it 100% of the time, it just
> > takes him a lot longer and costs him a lot more. Whereas a character
> > with +79 can't make it at all, since he never succeeds on a check.
>
> Yep.
> >
> > But since the highest craft DC is 25, you only need a skill of +15 to
> > make sure you can make anything in your craft. Increasing your skill
> > only allows you to make things faster.
>
> Nope. Again, the chart is for examples only, and the DM might assign a
> higher DC value.
>

Please see my response to Justisaur, which explains why I'm looking for
these otherwise absurd numbers.

"Pythor" <pythor@gmail.com> wrote in message

> Which I guess I need to look at. Was this a typo, though? Did you
> mean y gp, or are you really saying y xp? The cost is, in fact 100,000
> gp. The DC is negotiable, v is negotiable (though I wanted something
> on the order of months, and not years) and w is likely to be 50,000 gp
> (1/2 y, if y is gp).

Yeah, y gp, not y xp. Sorry for the typo.

> Please see my response to Justisaur, which explains why I'm looking for
> these otherwise absurd numbers.
>

I saw it...I'll post some thoughts.

--

"Pythor" <pythor@gmail.com> wrote in message
> Justisaur wrote:

>> But since the highest craft DC is 25, you only need a skill of +15 to
>> make sure you can make anything in your craft. Increasing your skill
>> only allows you to make things faster.

> Is this a cap according to the rules? or just the largest DC that
> is given in an example.

We've established that this is not a cap. If anyone has a question about
that, read the craft section, paying close attention to the section with the
numbered bullet points.

>I'm trying to figure the math on a system of
> making items that are greater than masterwork items, in that they are
> more expensive to produce, but are cheaper to add enhancements to. I
> want the whole thing to balance roughly with the normal magic item
> creation rules, so a +10 enhancement item is 100,000 gp (with the other
> 100,000 paid by enchanter.) Perhaps a DC of 100 is too high, but I
> really need to understand the logic here to be able to get a decent
> balance of Crafter skill required vs. the savings in the enchantment
> process.

Let's get some baseline figures out there. The base cost of a +10 equiv
longsword is (10^2)*2+300+15=200,315gp. The cost to craft it is 100,315gp,
along with 8,000 XP, and takes 200 days to produce.

> I see your point that failure isn't really an option, though I
> guess what I meant was where exceeding the actuall cost of buying the
> item was a failure.

> Let me explain: I want to create an alternate system for magic item
> creation based loosely on the way computer RPGS often do it. You have
> to have an item of a particular quality in order for it to accept
> enchantments. Each enchantment takes up "space" on the item, which I
> am going to say is a single rune. A higher DC allows you to create an
> item that can accept more runes. I figured enhancement squared equals
> number of runes needed, and DC = number of Runes, so a +5 Vorpal
> sword(+10 enhancement) is DC 100. Given your answer, I guess that
> won't work. Maybe some geometric sequence, instead of squaring will
> lead to better numbers. Or maybe I need to rethink the whole thing.

Let's try to back into the number that you like. The equation for making an
item using take 10 is:

Time=(Purchase Cost in GP)*10/(DC)*(skill modifier+10), where DC<(skill
modifier+10)

For simplicity, lets set DC=(skill modifer+10), else the DC can't be met
using take 10.

Therefore,

Time=(Purchase Cost in GP)*10/(DC^2), where DC can max out at about 75 for
a 20th level expert, per the info below.

You want to be able to make something in a max of about 20 weeks. The most
expensive thing that can be made in that time frame with a DC of 75 would
price out at (20*75^2)/10=11,250gp. That's for a 20th level expert with all
the goodies from below. A 40th level guy can hit DC95 to a max of
(20*95^2)/10=18,050gp for a 20 week production time. Maybe you need to set
up a workshop in a demiplane where time doesn't move at the same speed, or
give workshop bonuses for having elementals

> Either way, thank you for explaining the logic you used. I think
> I have a decent handle on the the crafting concept, though I didn't
> realise that making the cost so high would create an absurd problem in
> the time line. I also forgot to convert gp to sp, so that's where I
> got 10 weeks instead of 100.

You can craft magic value faster than mundane value. Magic can go to 1000gp
per day.

>I'd still like to find out what level of
> NPC would be needed to pull of those +90 skill checks.
>

How's this for a ballpark? Give the guy +10 for ability mod (natural and
magical), another +5 for having awesome tools, +10 from five assistants
aiding (they have to be about his level -10, with all the same goodies), +3
for skill focus, +2 racial for being a dwarf, chase down something like +5
divine assistance..that's 35. He still needs to be something like 52nd
level to have enough ranks to toss down a +90. I'm sure someone can trim it
down another 10 or more..but you're still talking about 40th level or so.

David

--
Anonymous

Justisaur wrote:>
> First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
> crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
> result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
> a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
> a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
> complete a 100,000 gp item.
>

OK, does this make sense to anyone? I want to make a 5,000 gp ring. I
use a 5,000 gp diamond, and make a simple ring, DC 20. It takes me
(5,000*10/(20*20)) 125 weeks to make. Now I want another. I've got
myself a 2,500 gp diamond, but I'll make the ring extra complex to make
up for it, DC 25. It now takes me (5,000*10/(25*25)) 80 weeks to make.
Huh? The more complex ring is done faster? The major determinant in
creation time is the base value of your materials? Am I crazy?
Anonymous

Pythor wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:>
> > First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
> > crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
> > result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
> > a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
> > a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
> > complete a 100,000 gp item.
> >
>
> OK, does this make sense to anyone? I want to make a 5,000 gp ring. I
> use a 5,000 gp diamond, and make a simple ring, DC 20. It takes me
> (5,000*10/(20*20)) 125 weeks to make. Now I want another. I've got
> myself a 2,500 gp diamond, but I'll make the ring extra complex to make
> up for it, DC 25. It now takes me (5,000*10/(25*25)) 80 weeks to make.
> Huh? The more complex ring is done faster? The major determinant in
> creation time is the base value of your materials? Am I crazy?

If you use a 5,000 GP diamond and only make a 5,000 GP ring then
the extra time was clearly taken cutting you diamond DOWN to a
1,666 GP diamond.

Why would you mount on a ring that adds no value? And if you are
silly enought to do such a thing then you are not actually crafting
the diamond and need not spend time for it.

The cost of materials is related to the value of the final product,
NOT an independent variable as you treat it above. And the more
complex item adds value faster because you can CHARGE MORE for
something fewer people can make, that is economics 101.

Also you assume above that both craftsmen are barely making their
check results, so the one making the first ring is less skilled,
but BOTH are using more expensive materials then they need to
implying a pair of incompetents.

DougL
Anonymous

DougL wrote:
> Pythor wrote:
>
>>Justisaur wrote:>
>>
>>>First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
>>>crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
>>>result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
>>>a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
>>>a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
>>>complete a 100,000 gp item.
>>>
>>
>>OK, does this make sense to anyone? I want to make a 5,000 gp ring. I
>>use a 5,000 gp diamond, and make a simple ring, DC 20. It takes me
>>(5,000*10/(20*20)) 125 weeks to make. Now I want another. I've got
>>myself a 2,500 gp diamond, but I'll make the ring extra complex to make
>>up for it, DC 25. It now takes me (5,000*10/(25*25)) 80 weeks to make.
>> Huh? The more complex ring is done faster? The major determinant in
>>creation time is the base value of your materials? Am I crazy?
>
>
> If you use a 5,000 GP diamond and only make a 5,000 GP ring then
> the extra time was clearly taken cutting you diamond DOWN to a
> 1,666 GP diamond.
>
> Why would you mount on a ring that adds no value? And if you are
> silly enought to do such a thing then you are not actually crafting
> the diamond and need not spend time for it.
>
> The cost of materials is related to the value of the final product,
> NOT an independent variable as you treat it above. And the more
> complex item adds value faster because you can CHARGE MORE for
> something fewer people can make, that is economics 101.
>
> Also you assume above that both craftsmen are barely making their
> check results, so the one making the first ring is less skilled,
> but BOTH are using more expensive materials then they need to
> implying a pair of incompetents.
>
> DougL
>

Remember, too, that you can voluntarily set the DC higher to make the
item faster.
Anonymous

Pythor wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:
> > Pythor wrote:
> > > I don't quite understand your point. Take 10 means that with a +90
> > > skill bonus, I succeed every time. So I guess my first question boils
> > > down to what skill bonus do I need to succeed 50% of the time, and what
> > > level can a perfectly specialised NPC be expected to have that bonus?
> > > Of course, then I need to figure out the same answers for a +190 bonus.
> > > Are you implying that anything less than +90 is effectively useless?
> > > Can you explain your reasoning?
> >
> > It sounds like you don't have much of a handle on the craft system. I'd
> > suggest reading through the craft skill a few times. There's nothing
> > that has a DC of 100 anyway, The highest DC is for alchemical items at
> > DC 25. Although you can voluntarily increase the DC in increments of
> > 10, which allows you to complete things faster.
> >
> > There is no such check that allows you to succeed 50% of the time.
> > Either you can do it or you can't. It'll just take you a hell of a lot
> > longer and cost you a hell of a lot more if you can't take 10.
> >
> > First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
> > crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
> > result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
> > a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
> > a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
> > complete a 100,000 gp item.
> >
> > If you don't have enough skill to take 10, lets go with the most
> > extreme example: You have a skill of +80, this means you only succeed
> > on a DC 100 check when you roll a 20, or 5% of the time. This means it
> > is going to take you 20x as long, or 2000 weeks or 40 years. We also
> > need to consider one other thing, which is it costs you 1/2 of the base
> > materials cost every time you fail by 5 or more. the base materials
> > cost is 1/3 of the end value of the time, so for a 100,000 gp item it
> > would be 33,333 gp so every time you fail by 5 or more you cost
> > yourself 16,666 gp. Since you fail by 5 or more 75% of the time it's
> > going to cost you an average of 24,999,000 gp to create that 100,000 gp
> > item, where the person who has a +90 it cost him 33,000 gp.
> >
> > So the person with a +80 still can make it 100% of the time, it just
> > takes him a lot longer and costs him a lot more. Whereas a character
> > with +79 can't make it at all, since he never succeeds on a check.
> >
> > But since the highest craft DC is 25, you only need a skill of +15 to
> > make sure you can make anything in your craft. Increasing your skill
> > only allows you to make things faster.

> Is this a cap according to the rules? or just the largest DC that
> is given in an example. I'm trying to figure the math on a system of
> making items that are greater than masterwork items, in that they are
> more expensive to produce, but are cheaper to add enhancements to. I
> want the whole thing to balance roughly with the normal magic item
> creation rules, so a +10 enhancement item is 100,000 gp (with the other
> 100,000 paid by enchanter.) Perhaps a DC of 100 is too high, but I
> really need to understand the logic here to be able to get a decent
> balance of Crafter skill required vs. the savings in the enchantment
> process.

It's the largest DC given, but it covers everythign that can be made in
the rules. If you want to introduce higher DCs for new items that's up
to you.

> I see your point that failure isn't really an option, though I
> guess what I meant was where exceeding the actuall cost of buying the
> item was a failure.

You can't really determine that, except for a particular instance. It
depends on the cost and DC of the item. Failure by 5 or more increases
cost 1/6th of the end value of the item, and you start with a 1/3 you
can only fail 3 times before you equal the cost of the item. In your
example again, if you had a +89 this would mean you would fail 5 or
more 30% of the time. Unfortunately as it takes you an average of
slightly more than 200 weeks on average this means you've infact failed
an average of 60x, which means you've paid the equivilent cost of the
item 10x over. If you get one more skill point you are again where you
never fail.

> Let me explain: I want to create an alternate system for magic item
> creation based loosely on the way computer RPGS often do it. You have
> to have an item of a particular quality in order for it to accept
> enchantments. Each enchantment takes up "space" on the item, which I
> am going to say is a single rune. A higher DC allows you to create an
> item that can accept more runes. I figured enhancement squared equals
> number of runes needed, and DC = number of Runes, so a +5 Vorpal
> sword(+10 enhancement) is DC 100. Given your answer, I guess that
> won't work. Maybe some geometric sequence, instead of squaring will
> lead to better numbers. Or maybe I need to rethink the whole thing.

If you want to make it the way computer games work, then no. II don't
see a problem with requireing only 2 years to make something of that
high of a power. Some non-magical katanas in Real Life (tm) took that
long to make.

What I did is made a feat for crafters, which uses the existing magic
creation rules, modified slightly. You still create the base
masterwork part normally, then it's 1000 gp per day as usual for the
magical part.

MAGICAL CRAFTSMAN:
You can imbue items you personally create with powerful magic.
PREREQUISITE: Craft Skill 5+
BENEFIT: Your Craft skill rank -3 is substituted for the spell caster
level for purposes of fulfilling the prerequisites of item creation.
When you enchant an item that was both crafted by you and that is a
masterwork item if applicable, you can substitute your craft rank -3
for your caster level for purposes of fulfilling the prerequisites of
any specific item. If the item has any spells as prerequisites that you
cannot supply, or is not supplied by another working with you, you can
pay quintuple XP cost (1/5 base cost) to fulfill those spell
requirements, however your character level must be at least equal to
the lowest level at which a single-classed character could attain the
spell. Magical Craftsman applies to only one craft skill, and any
magic items made with it must be able to be made wholly with crafts you
have the Magical Craftsman feat for.

- Justisaur
Anonymous

Pythor wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:>
> > First I need to explain how to figure out how far along you get
> > crafting something: If you succeed, you times the DC by the check
> > result and that's 1/10 of the gold cost you completed. So if you had
> > a DC 100 item, with a check of 100 you'd be doing 1,000 gp worth of it
> > a week, so it would take you 100 weeks, or just under 2 years to
> > complete a 100,000 gp item.
> >
>

> OK, does this make sense to anyone? I want to make a 5,000 gp ring. I
> use a 5,000 gp diamond, and make a simple ring, DC 20.

No. The materials cost is 1/3 the final product's value. To make a
5000 gp ring you use 1666 gp in material. Secondly a simple ring
should have a DC of 10. But if your skill is high enough you can
voluntarily raise it to DC 20.

> It takes me
> (5,000*10/(20*20)) 125 weeks to make.

looks ok. assuming your skill is +10, and you are taking 10, and
you've voluntarily increased the DC to 20...

> Now I want another. I've got
> myself a 2,500 gp diamond, but I'll make the ring extra complex to make
> up for it, DC 25. It now takes me (5,000*10/(25*25)) 80 weeks to make.

Well you've got all your comparisons all messed up here. If you are
going for a more complex item it doesn't affect the value of the
materials you have to use. So for a 5000 gp item you still need 1666
gp in materials, the cost of materials doesn't change, the DC does
though. However you aren't comaring the same character here. if it's
DC 25, the same guy above who's got +10 to his skill is going to fail a
DC 25 check 3/4ths of the time, and have to pay for extra materials 1/2
of the time. It's going to take him 4x longer to make than the
previous ring, and it's going to cost him somewhere on the order of
50,000 gp to make.

Also the most a complex ring's DC is going to be is 20. Only
alchemical items go to 25. (assuming you aren't making new DCs)

> Huh? The more complex ring is done faster? The major determinant in
> creation time is the base value of your materials? Am I crazy?

Due to the way the DCs work it is possible for an item with a n5 DC to
be quicker to create than an item with a n0 DC if the character in
question has a skill bonus of n5 to n9. If the above example of a 5000
gp item the character creating it had a +15 skill bonus, he would be
able to create the DC 25 item faster than the DC 20 item. Using the
formula (Item cost in GP)*10/DC*(Take 10 Skill check) would be
5000*10/(20*25)=100 for the first and 5000*10/(25*25)=80 for the 2nd.
It's a see-saw effect however, as if we raise the character's skill
bonus again to +20, he can increase the DC of the first item by 10
again to 30, so he now does the first item with a formula
5000*10/(30*30)=55 where the 2nd is 5000*10/(25*30)=66.

- Justisaur
Anonymous

Justisaur wrote:
>
> If you want to make it the way computer games work, then no. II don't
> see a problem with requireing only 2 years to make something of that
> high of a power. Some non-magical katanas in Real Life (tm) took that
> long to make.
I don't think I was quite clear. I want the crafter to have the
responsibility for making an item that can accept runes, while a
spellcaster would still be required to make the runes themselves. The
item has no special abilities until the runes are added, adn the runes
have (little or) no power until the are placed into an appropriately
crafted item. The benefits: customizing an existing item is easier
than crafting a new item, the cost of construction is split more evenly
between the crafter and the spellcaster, characters are encouraged to
keep their items longer, as they can enhance the item more as they
enchantments cost a lot more up front. Items with few or no rune slots
are de-valued. Item enhancements can be awarded as treasure directly,
instead of being awarded as money that gets translated into a craft
item feat. More DM control. }  The idea is to award well-crafted
items at low levels, and then have various runes found as treasure
and/or payments for services later on in the characters career.
>
> What I did is made a feat for crafters, which uses the existing magic
> creation rules, modified slightly. You still create the base
> masterwork part normally, then it's 1000 gp per day as usual for the
> magical part.
>
> MAGICAL CRAFTSMAN:
> You can imbue items you personally create with powerful magic.
> PREREQUISITE: Craft Skill 5+
> BENEFIT: Your Craft skill rank -3 is substituted for the spell caster
> level for purposes of fulfilling the prerequisites of item creation.
> When you enchant an item that was both crafted by you and that is a
> masterwork item if applicable, you can substitute your craft rank -3
> for your caster level for purposes of fulfilling the prerequisites of
> any specific item. If the item has any spells as prerequisites that you
> cannot supply, or is not supplied by another working with you, you can
> pay quintuple XP cost (1/5 base cost) to fulfill those spell
> requirements, however your character level must be at least equal to
> the lowest level at which a single-classed character could attain the
> spell. Magical Craftsman applies to only one craft skill, and any
> magic items made with it must be able to be made wholly with crafts you
> have the Magical Craftsman feat for.
>
> - Justisaur

"Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> Pythor wrote:
>> Justisaur wrote:

>> > But since the highest craft DC is 25, you only need a skill of +15 to
>> > make sure you can make anything in your craft. Increasing your skill
>> > only allows you to make things faster.
>
>> Is this a cap according to the rules? or just the largest DC that
>> is given in an example.
<snip>

> It's the largest DC given, but it covers everythign that can be made in
> the rules. If you want to introduce higher DCs for new items that's up
> to you.

"Find the DC from the table below, or have the DM set one." Player's
Handbook p.70.

It is within the rules to set DCs, including DCs greater than 25. It does
not introduce anything extraneous. To suggest otherwise is to conlcude that
a tanglefoot bag is the ultimate alchemical process with respect to
complexity of craft, for example. Or that a complex lock is the ultimate
mechanical device that can be made. The list is specifically non-complete.

YOMV.

David

--
Anonymous

OK, So what the rules say is that no matter what my skill level is, if
I have 10 gp worth of materials, I can't make anything worth more than
30gp. So a skillful jeweler gets no additional mileage out of his
jewels or precious metals. And apparently, glass, which is made out of
sand which is basically free, can never be worth anything at all,
unless you add something else to it first. Meanwhile, a simple ring
made of gold takes 100 times longer to make than a simple ring made of
glass. Even if the two artisans have the same skill level.
I realise I'm splitting hairs here, but I've never taken a real pointed
look at this aspect of the system before, and I don't really like what
I see. I'm not arguing your interpretation. You're doing an excellent
job of explaining the RAW, which I am doing a poor job of understanding
by myself. But as I begin to understand the rules as they apply, I'm
getting more confused with the abstraction. My suspension of disbelief
is failing.
Anonymous

Pythor wrote:
> OK, So what the rules say is that no matter what my skill level is, if
> I have 10 gp worth of materials, I can't make anything worth more than
> 30gp. So a skillful jeweler gets no additional mileage out of his
> jewels or precious metals. And apparently, glass, which is made out of
> sand which is basically free, can never be worth anything at all,
> unless you add something else to it first. Meanwhile, a simple ring
> made of gold takes 100 times longer to make than a simple ring made of
> glass. Even if the two artisans have the same skill level.
> I realise I'm splitting hairs here, but I've never taken a real pointed
> look at this aspect of the system before, and I don't really like what
> I see. I'm not arguing your interpretation. You're doing an excellent
> job of explaining the RAW, which I am doing a poor job of understanding
> by myself. But as I begin to understand the rules as they apply, I'm
> getting more confused with the abstraction. My suspension of disbelief
> is failing.

I'll do you one better. The speed at which you craft things is
dependant upon its price. If you decide you're going to give a 25%
discount for the rest of your life, you will craft items that much
faster.
Anonymous

Nick vanRjin wrote:
> I'll do you one better. The speed at which you craft things is
> dependant upon its price. If you decide you're going to give a 25%
> discount for the rest of your life, you will craft items that much
> faster.

Hey! Does this mean that a crafter who takes Vow of Poverty, and has
to give everything away (for 0 gp!) can make anything in 1 week?
That's a heck of a feat!
Anonymous

Pythor wrote:
> OK, So what the rules say is that no matter what my skill level is, if
> I have 10 gp worth of materials, I can't make anything worth more than
> 30gp.

Yep.

> So a skillful jeweler gets no additional mileage out of his
> jewels or precious metals. And apparently, glass, which is made out of
> sand which is basically free, can never be worth anything at all,
> unless you add something else to it first.

No. The materials cost is an abstraction. This includes everything you
are using to make the item that is used up in the process. In the case
of the glass, this could infact be the cost of transportation of the
sand from the beach to your far inland shop, the cost of whatever fuel
you are using to melt the sand, whatever flux you are using to clarify
the glass (you don't just take some sand and melt it and have nice
clear glass) the cost over time of repairs on you equipment, and if you
really want to get fantasy you could say the recipe for a glass ring
includes a roc feather or some other similarly rare creature because
that's tradition and BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN (tm) if you try to do
without.

> Meanwhile, a simple ring
> made of gold takes 100 times longer to make than a simple ring made of
> glass.

Again not necessarily. You are trying to break down the abstraction.
The cost of a glass ring if made exquisitly (ie. masterwork) could
easily outstrip a simple cast gold ring. The material for a typical
gold ring would be far less than a single goldpiece in value, yet
you'll find typical values for jewelry made of gold are a lot more than
1 gp. Almost all of that is going to be due to something else than the
material the finished product is made out of.

I'm not saying it's a perfect system, but it works well enough for D&D.
My last campain focused extensively around crafting stuff, so I
figured the lot of this out... One of my PCs made a couple adamantine
weapons, and it took his character upwards of 6 months game time to
make the first one. I think in retrospect I might have wanted to
change the rules so the material an item was made out of didn't count
toward the craft time, and was just an additional cost tacked on.

- Justisaur
Anonymous

Justisaur wrote:
>
> I'm not saying it's a perfect system, but it works well enough for D&D.

Right... It's probably just sour grapes. I was looking forward to
designing this neat little magic item hack around the crafting system,
and the crafting system has been abstracted to the point where I can't
use it. I shouldn't be complaining. What I should be doing, is taking
a step back and rethinking the whole concept. Now that I have a better
understanding of the system, I can take it into account. Thanks,
again. If I get something workable, I'll post again.

On 22 Sep 2005 13:31:58 -0700, "Pythor" <pythor@gmail.com> raised a
finger to the sky and proclaimed:

>
>Nick vanRjin wrote:
>> I'll do you one better. The speed at which you craft things is
>> dependant upon its price. If you decide you're going to give a 25%
>> discount for the rest of your life, you will craft items that much
>> faster.
>
>
>Hey! Does this mean that a crafter who takes Vow of Poverty, and has
>to give everything away (for 0 gp!) can make anything in 1 week?
>That's a heck of a feat!

Heh.

--
Either way, I hate you Count Chocula, if I didn't already.
- Drifter Bob, rec.games.frp.dnd
Anonymous

David wrote:
> "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>>Pythor wrote:
>>
>>>Justisaur wrote:
>
>
>>>>But since the highest craft DC is 25, you only need a skill of +15 to
>>>>make sure you can make anything in your craft. Increasing your skill
>>>>only allows you to make things faster.
>>
>>> Is this a cap according to the rules? or just the largest DC that
>>>is given in an example.
>
> <snip>
>
>>It's the largest DC given, but it covers everythign that can be made in
>>the rules. If you want to introduce higher DCs for new items that's up
>>to you.
>
>
> "Find the DC from the table below, or have the DM set one." Player's
> Handbook p.70.
>
> It is within the rules to set DCs, including DCs greater than 25. It does
> not introduce anything extraneous. To suggest otherwise is to conlcude that
> a tanglefoot bag is the ultimate alchemical process with respect to
> complexity of craft, for example. Or that a complex lock is the ultimate
> mechanical device that can be made. The list is specifically non-complete.
>
> YOMV.
>
> David
>

In most cases, crafting an item is a multistage process, and the DC sets
how much progress is made per week. Thus, an item's creation DC isn't
just the DC to make the whole thing, but how difficult each stage is to
make, so the DM should set the DC accordingly.
Anonymous

Pythor wrote:
> OK, So what the rules say is that no matter what my skill level is, if
> I have 10 gp worth of materials, I can't make anything worth more than
> 30gp. So a skillful jeweler gets no additional mileage out of his
> jewels or precious metals.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. It's the cost of the gems & gold
that is part of the price of the item, so they do count as part of the
materials cost. In other words, the final price determines the cost of
raw materials, not the other way around.

>And apparently, glass, which is made out of
> sand which is basically free, can never be worth anything at all,
> unless you add something else to it first. Meanwhile, a simple ring
> made of gold takes 100 times longer to make than a simple ring made of
> glass. Even if the two artisans have the same skill level.

I don't use the Craft rules much, so I'm not that familiar with them,
but the DC for a glass ring and a gold ring should be exactly the same
if they're both simple rings. The DC is how hard it is to make and
should have nothing to do with the material it's made of. My
understanding is that the material cost makes the process take longer
because that's part of what makes it valuable to begin with. The Craft
skill sort of mentions that in passing, along with the labor involved.

> I realise I'm splitting hairs here, but I've never taken a real pointed
> look at this aspect of the system before, and I don't really like what
> I see. I'm not arguing your interpretation. You're doing an excellent
> job of explaining the RAW, which I am doing a poor job of understanding
> by myself. But as I begin to understand the rules as they apply, I'm
> getting more confused with the abstraction. My suspension of disbelief
> is failing.
>

Let's see here:

Glass ring = 3 GP (30 SP)
Gold ring = 300 GP (3000 SP)
Craft DC 5
Craft skill = +10.

By taking 10, you'll get a 20 result every week. 20 x 5 = 100 SP of
progress. This mean you'll make the glass ring in 3 days but the gold
ring in 30 weeks.

If you voluntarily increase the DC by 10 to 15, and we still assume a
total result of 20 each week, we get 20 x 15 = 300 SP of progress, which
means you can make it in 10 weeks instead.
Anonymous

Nick vanRjin wrote:
> Pythor wrote:
>
>>OK, So what the rules say is that no matter what my skill level is, if
>>I have 10 gp worth of materials, I can't make anything worth more than
>>30gp. So a skillful jeweler gets no additional mileage out of his
>>jewels or precious metals. And apparently, glass, which is made out of
>>sand which is basically free, can never be worth anything at all,
>>unless you add something else to it first. Meanwhile, a simple ring
>>made of gold takes 100 times longer to make than a simple ring made of
>>glass. Even if the two artisans have the same skill level.
>>I realise I'm splitting hairs here, but I've never taken a real pointed
>>look at this aspect of the system before, and I don't really like what
>>I see. I'm not arguing your interpretation. You're doing an excellent
>>job of explaining the RAW, which I am doing a poor job of understanding
>>by myself. But as I begin to understand the rules as they apply, I'm
>>getting more confused with the abstraction. My suspension of disbelief
>>is failing.
>
>
> I'll do you one better. The speed at which you craft things is
> dependant upon its price. If you decide you're going to give a 25%
> discount for the rest of your life, you will craft items that much
> faster.
>

Well, the market price is what you use, not the price you intend to sell
it for.
Anonymous

Pythor wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:
>
>>I'm not saying it's a perfect system, but it works well enough for D&D.
>
>
> Right... It's probably just sour grapes. I was looking forward to
> designing this neat little magic item hack around the crafting system,
> and the crafting system has been abstracted to the point where I can't
> use it. I shouldn't be complaining. What I should be doing, is taking
> a step back and rethinking the whole concept. Now that I have a better
> understanding of the system, I can take it into account. Thanks,
> again. If I get something workable, I'll post again.
>

For most things, the system is flexible enough that it can probably
accomodate what you want. If you have it, check out the Craft rules in
the Epic Handbook for what an epic-level crafter should be able to do
with a high-enough skill bonus.
Related resources:
!