Hello. I think I am going mad, or possibly stupid.
I am thinking of a mage, who would like to make things with creo magic, and I can't reconcile most to all of the creo spells to make things in the book with the craft magic rules.
Lots of the spells add magnitude for complexity, but they also need a finesse roll at a higher difficulty? If I cast the spell to summon a wizards tower, do I need to also make a finesse roll?
The Laboratory of Bonisagus, from covenants, needs 5 levels of complexity and also makes perfect equipment. Is that going to be a difficulty 18 finess roll? Or even more since a lab is more than a day's work?
One rule I'd seen (in @ironboundtome's blog) is the possibility of adding complexity magnitudes to reduce the Finesse EF:
The rule would be this:
Suggested new Guideline:
Caster gains +3 bonus to the Finesse check for each Magnitude added for Finesse Complexity in spell design. This complexity may only be added where the description also produces a higher quality and beauty item, and must produce a more specific result for each step in magnitude.
To close the loophole, on his blog he links this other thread here, where the spell Echo of Durendal was proposed by @virgileso:
The only agreement on this forum regarding Magic crafting rules is that there is a "slight" discrepancy between the core rule and the various supplements.
Beyond that, around one thousand ideas on what are really, really the TRUE GOOD RULES or what the authors meant but failed to clearly explain
The Creo section of the main rulebook makes it clear that artificial things created by magic require an Int + Finesse roll to determine how good they are. This seldom matters and probably shouldn't be used to punish a character using ritual magics to create stuff.
While I don't have a book to check, my home game has generally only used simple dice for those stress rolls, and the success of it only really determines aesthetics or style, but has no actual game effects. A good roll might make something more durable or more artistic, but a terrible roll is 'functional but ugly, no game effects'.
Thinking as a storyteller I find it punitive to see players spending vis and energy on Creo items which are useless. Balancing counter-point is thinking about magi using Creo for non-perm items.
You could (?) also say that a basic Finesse check is needed for Creo spells where the difficulty is set by the SG, ... where a botch is an unknown flaw or a complete nightmare, an ordinary failure isn't really serviceable or contains an obvious flaw, and a pass is functionally ok. The more specific the detail or complexity the higher the roll needed.
nightmare = castle is conjured and shatters, or a sword looks normal but falls apart on first use,
fail = castle layout is borked and needs repairs and fixes to be serviceable. Sword is poor but can still be used in a pinch.
Now that I think about it this might be RAW anyway. Need sleep.
This always seemed a bit weak to me. Using Creo magic is pulling from the Realm of Forms - you'd think you would get stuff made by skilled artisans by default. Semi-skilled workers are producing sub-standard goods. What makes sense for Rego Craft Magic doesn't make the same sense for Creo conjurations.
I agree with John (p60, HoH:S). The way Creo magic is described, it should be at least of good quality.
Rolls are needed for adding details and for artistic creation. The way I see it, true artistic creation is about creating something that does not exists, that is going from the fertile mind of the artist, thus does not exist in the Realm of Form.
You could also argue that since Creo magic is drawing from the Realm of Form, why could not Rego magic do the same ? Well, unfortunately, I believe (so just my point of view), it is just for a kind of game balance to keep relevant mundane craftsmen, otherwise each covenant will have one Finesse specialist with a portfolio of spells and do all craftsmen jobs, reducing even further the interaction between the Hermetic society and the rest of the world.
If you check between the various sources, 9 is the number for "standard" goods, not the quality for substandard goods. You could use 12, though. 6 is for substandard or "shoddy" goods. 15 is for well above standard, where C&G puts "Superior." The point of the rule is that you get something of standard, functional quality, but not something especially intricate, perfectly balanced, etc.
Welcome to the medieval.
I admit I am not a historian, but it seems plausible too me that specialists ... what is called skilled craftsmen with scores of 6+ in some supplements ... are exceedingly rare in medieval society.
Most goods are likely produced by peasants who double up with one or more side trades on top of keeping a small farmstead or a fishing boat. These people can produce good, solid craftsmanship worth buying at the market, but they do not meet the ArM criterion for a skilled craftsman.
That would be fairly typical today, too. A trained apprentice who is not yet a mastery would be "semi-skilled labor" on this scale. Consider lots of construction/craft stuff these days. If you want some great quality stuff, you go to master artisans and the like. But your run-of-the-mill, good quality building construction, for example, is almost entirely done by "semi-skilled labor." You don't hire a master carpenter to frame a wall, for example, and that doesn't mean the wall won't be framed properly.
The assumption on the chart on page 61 in HoH:S is that the magus is familiar with the object being created (+0). You could probably get away with giving an unrolled 12 for those objects a magus could claim deep familiarity with (+3), as per the chart on page 62 without too much problem - it would be one of those concrete reasons why magi study realia?