Talk:Krachtdwerg (3.5e Race)

Balance
So... how is this not better than a Dwarf for any class without Dexterity dependency? --Foxwarrior 02:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Trading magical resistances, stonecunning, and the cost of situational +X vs X bonuses in exchange for a mechanic to item creation that probably should be a global rule. More importantly though it is more fitting with my idea of dwarves being the crafters of the magical one ring and whatnot, without making them all secretly wizards.  In terms of power, this does benefit the fighter muchly.  Now he is no longer shackled to the hip to the wizard to provide gear, and if he's a proper Fighter than he can use his non-fighter bonus feats to obtain item creation feats, without loosing too much fighting ability due to lack of feats.  The benefit is smaller if he's a wizard or another spellcaster, since the crafting abilities are redundant... he already has the CL and spells to craft even if he weren't a dwarf.


 * The biggest loss here over traditional dwarves is the magic resistance bonus on saves. I think the loss of that in exchange for crafting prowess (provided you spend feats on such) is fair.  And if you don't spend feats on item creation, well you can use Reforge to make a sunder build useful. -- Eiji-kun 02:31, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * And the "use every wand you find" thing? - Tarkisflux Talk 02:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I found it suitable. This mostly benefits the non-magic using classes, but does introduce a little MAD.  You need a sufficient mental score to use it (which for wants, would be 14 for 4th lvl spells).  The magic users either already had the spells on hand or using the wands associated with their spell list.  Do you think its too much? -- Eiji-kun 02:57, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I think you have spell trigger confused with spell completion, like scrolls. You don't need a high ability score to use a spell trigger item like a wand, you just need it on your class list. And since this race has every spell on their class list, they get to use every wand. I think it's probably too much given the other things they get. - Tarkisflux Talk 03:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I forgot that. In that case I agree and will limited to spell completion items. -- Eiji-kun 03:24, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, spell completion items don't reference attributes at all (just looked at them again). Instead they reference class level. So they can't use any spell completion items in a special way at all. Which is fine as far as I'm concerned, they should be making fancy permanent use activated versions of spells they want with their craft abilities, not making scrolls or wands. - Tarkisflux Talk 03:27, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Really? Hmm, wait...  which one requires high ability scores then?  Staves?


 * In any case, thats a little bit of a bummer. While not a huge loss, what do you think of it idea of them using wands only they have crafted?  Then again, that might be clunky somehow.  I have a feeling it would just be better to remove that bit altogether it seems. -- Eiji-kun 03:34, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Were it me, I'd probably just give them every spell for crafting purposes, but deny them the ability to craft spell completion or spell trigger items with the racial ability. I don't see a race of crafters making wands or scrolls or staves, I see them making rings and rods and weapons and armor and wondrous items. Things that are actually crafted rather than just enchanted to spit out a spell every now and again. So I'd prefer a complete removal for fluff reasons. - Tarkisflux Talk 05:52, 19 June 2012 (UTC)