PDA

View Full Version : Tenser's Transformation Not Powerful Enough



bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 09:19 AM
Ok, when Tenser's Transformation was first slated to be released, I had some of these concerns. I ended up trying it out and seeing if it was going to be worth the investment. But Tenser's just doesn't translate from pnp nearly well enough.

Furthermore, you (Devs) KNOW it doesn't translate well, because anytime you make a Tenser-like ability, you make it useful.

Let's compare some spells and spell-like abilities.

Divine Power - Lvl 4 spell - +6 enhancement bonus to STR - Fighter BAB progression - Retain spell-casting ability.

This is such a great spell, that all classes use it via clickies. Retaining spell-casting abilities while becoming a Fighter with a +6 str item is great.

Tenser's Transformation - Lvl 6 spell - +4 enhancement bonus to STR, CON, DEX - Fighter BAB progression - Lose spell-casting ability - +5 competance bonus to Fort Saves - +4 natural bonus to AC.

Wow, where do I start. The only things good about this spell is the Fighter BAB progression and the +5 compentence to Fort Saves. +4 enhancement bonus to the stats is likely only seen in DEX... and DEX just doesn't help 95% of casters in DDO. The Natural AC bonus doesn't help for the exact same reasons. By the time a caster gets to 12-13 to use this spell... they should already be wearing +5's if not +6's. On top of that... you lose the ability to cast spells while under the influence of this spell.

Ok... so maybe the devs just think TT is better than it is.

No...

Because then we look at Bladesworn Transformation. And everybody's input for what TT should be was put into BT. BT gives most of the same bonuses as TT, except it gives profane bonuses to STR and CON.

That's exactly what people said TT was going to need if people were going to use it. Why can't TT give profane bonuses the same as BT?

Tenkari_Rozahas
02-28-2008, 09:30 AM
um, the natural armor part would stack with their robes or bracers of armor, becoes those are an AC bonus to Armor. so +4 AC isnt all that bad. and with the +4 to dex, your essentially getting +6 to AC. as far as i kno. the only NA thing in the game is Barkskin and the potions based on it.

As far as I know, there are not Natural armor items in the game aside founder items.

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 09:34 AM
um, the natural armor part would stack with their robes or bracers of armor, becoes those are an AC bonus to Armor. so +4 AC isnt all that bad. and with the +4 to dex, your essentially getting +6 to AC. as far as i kno. the only NA thing in the game is Barkskin and the potions based on it.

As far as I know, there are not Natural armor items in the game aside founder items.

Yes... but seeing as most casters I know have an AC of 10.. upping that to an AC of 16 is beyond trivial.

(Yes.. I know there are AC specced casters that can achieve a 42 or whatever... please don't respond saying that YOU have an AC.)

The point is that the offensive output is neither as powerful as BT or Divine Power. Both are lower level spell and spell-like abilities. TT should have, at the very least, the same offensive output as these lower level spells.

MysticTheurge
02-28-2008, 10:04 AM
The bonus to Natural Armor from Tenser's should stack with the bonus from Barkskin.

Tenser's gives an actual Natural Armor bonus:


You gain a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, a +4 natural armor bonus to AC, a +5 competence bonus on Fortitude saves, and proficiency with all simple and martial weapons. Your base attack bonus equals your character level (which may give you multiple attacks).

While Barkskin gives an enhancement bonus to natural armor


Barkskin toughens a creature’s skin. The effect grants a +2 enhancement bonus to the creature’s existing natural armor bonus. This enhancement bonus increases by 1 for every three caster levels above 3rd, to a maximum of +5 at caster level 12th.

Normally, we're all assumed to have a natural armor bonus of +0. But a caster with Tenser's up has a natural armor bonus of +4. The bonus from barkskin should stack with this.

Other than that, the spell is working properly.

llevenbaxx
02-28-2008, 10:11 AM
TT also has some distinct advantages over BT. For one, its basically a once per shrine use as opposed to how many scrolls you are carrying, with the super long timer it has. Also you cant be healed by a conventional cleric, only repaired I believe, which severely limits the situations you can put it to use.

I would agree that TT's Natural armor bonus would be much better if it stacked with other natural bonuses but I dont really see them going back on that now. It would be helpful to many mages(like me:)) who put some work into getting their AC into the mid 40s, wouldnt mind seeing that at all.

Angelus_dead
02-28-2008, 10:19 AM
Ok, when Tenser's Transformation was first slated to be released, I had some of these concerns. I ended up trying it out and seeing if it was going to be worth the investment. But Tenser's just doesn't translate from pnp nearly well enough.
In reality, Tenser's Transformation was implemented very accurately: barely any PnP caster ever uses Tenser's, and the same is true in DDO.

I would prefer if that were changed so that Tenser's could occasionally be useful. There are two steps to fixing it:

1. Allow Tenser's Transformation to be dismissed at any time. Since DDO does not have a generic way to dismiss spells, you should be able to cancel Tenser's anytime simply by attempting to cast some other spell. Until this fix is added, a mage casting Tenser's may as well send a message to the party: "Hey guys, I won't contribute to my main role for 3:35, good luck without a caster!"

2. Nerf Divine Power clickies, which are not an allowed magic item in PnP D&D rules. The simplest way to nerf them would be to delete them completely, but I don't recommend that. Instead, change them so the BAB bonus can be only +1 per 4 HD of the user; that way, DP clickies will bring rogues and bards to 1:1 BAB, but wizards and sorcerers will only reach 3:4 BAB.

Lucian_Navarro
02-28-2008, 10:41 AM
A very nice post and you are correct. When this spell came out it was very usefull for my type a build but later it was lacking as I began to compare it to other simular spells such as Divine Power which you gain partial bonuses but retain the ability to cast spells.

I dont want to present a negative without offering a positive so my suggestion would be to perhaps double the duration or add a Melee Alacrity bonus that stacks with Haste or maybe give the caster the ability to cast?

Yes, the last part might be a little too agressive and make it overpowering but the truth is, I dont cast it anymore and simply have collected 4 pairs of Madstone boots.

If you are wondering by now, my build is a Fighter (1) / Wizard (15) so she has weapon and armor proficiencies, stat bonuses of +6 so the inate improvements that come from Tensers is minimal as compared to Madstone due to the stacking ability of the Rage.

Just my two cents...

ZEIRA
"The Angry Blue Faerie"

jkm
02-28-2008, 11:12 AM
The bonus to Natural Armor from Tenser's should stack with the bonus from Barkskin.

Tenser's gives an actual Natural Armor bonus:



While Barkskin gives an enhancement bonus to natural armor



Normally, we're all assumed to have a natural armor bonus of +0. But a caster with Tenser's up has a natural armor bonus of +4. The bonus from barkskin should stack with this.

Other than that, the spell is working properly.

which it doesn't as if you take a barkskin pot and then put on tensers your bark disappears. i use tensers a lot on my bards.

tihocan
02-28-2008, 11:57 AM
The problem may be more that there exist divine power clickies in the first place. If they didn't exist, TT would be the primary choice for a caster who wants to fight. But using DP clickies is so much better that it makes TT worthless.
Now, I certainly don't want DP clickies to go away (I have a build who relies on them), so I wouldn't mind boosting TT a bit :)

DSL
02-28-2008, 12:50 PM
Tenser's Transformation was always intended as a very situational spell, and wasn't meant to be a commonly-used staple of wizards everywhere. In PnP, most wizards never bother with it, considering it too limiting, and often too dangerous, to cast. However, for some it is very useful, and I have seen it used to great effect, but it's definitely not for everyone.

That said, I do believe that it should be beefed up somewhat for DDO, all things considered. Allowing the bonuses to scale by level would be a big benefit, and allowing it to be dismissed (much like barbarian rage) might be appropriate, considering how much can happen in DDO during the spell's duration. Making it too good, however, is a mistake, as it should remain a niche spell.

Angelus_dead
02-28-2008, 12:59 PM
Making it too good, however, is a mistake, as it should remain a niche spell.
Yes, but the correct goal is to make Tenser's Transformation such that when a high-level wizard wants to buff himself and fight in melee, TT is his first choice. (Until we get some better spell, like Body of War)

Currently in order of preference your choices are:
1. Divine Power clicky
2. Madstone boots clicky
3. Tenser's Transformation scroll
4. Tenser's Transformation memorized spell

Why is the TT scroll prefered over the spell? 1. The spell uses Bull Potions as a special material component, meaning it takes as much room in your inventory as carrying scrolls. 2. The scrolls don't take slots out of your spell list. 3. The scrolls last shorter than if you had cast it yourself, reducing the chance you'll get in trouble because you can't cast a needed spell

That's why I suggest first nerfing DP so it doesn't raise wizards to BAB 16, and second improving Tenser's Transformation so it doesn't block spellcasting. Casting a spell should dismiss Tenser's Transformation, which achieves the goal of preventing a wizard from using TT for defense while casting spells at the same time, but without making TT into a self-imposed death trap.

Lucian_Navarro
02-28-2008, 01:07 PM
The last post nailed it perfectly. The order of use and desire is exactly that.
If they could change just one thing about TT and allow it to be dismissed manually or nulled when a spell is cast like Combat Expertise. I would add it back into my spell slot as I could get a longer duration that way over a scroll. (but carry scrolls when either mana is gone or I swap a spell)

Hey Dev's.... "make it so"

DSL
02-28-2008, 01:54 PM
Yes, but the correct goal is to make Tenser's Transformation such that when a high-level wizard wants to buff himself and fight in melee, TT is his first choice. (Until we get some better spell, like Body of War)

Currently in order of preference your choices are:
1. Divine Power clicky
2. Madstone boots clicky
3. Tenser's Transformation scroll
4. Tenser's Transformation memorized spell

Why is the TT scroll prefered over the spell? 1. The spell uses Bull Potions as a special material component, meaning it takes as much room in your inventory as carrying scrolls. 2. The scrolls don't take slots out of your spell list. 3. The scrolls last shorter than if you had cast it yourself, reducing the chance you'll get in trouble because you can't cast a needed spell

That's why I suggest first nerfing DP so it doesn't raise wizards to BAB 16, and second improving Tenser's Transformation so it doesn't block spellcasting. Casting a spell should dismiss Tenser's Transformation, which achieves the goal of preventing a wizard from using TT for defense while casting spells at the same time, but without making TT into a self-imposed death trap.


The main limitation on DP clickies should be that the BAB caps at the spell's caster level (i.e. normally 7), making it distinctly less useful past level 9-10. Likewise, the number one change that TT needs is the ability to dismiss it.

But you are correct in that a wizard or sorcerer who wants to build around melee/tanking should be able to think of this as his best option. However, here DDO is following the PnP model, with little deviation, wherein clerics have the best self-buffs for melee. It has often been joked that, in PnP, with access to Divine Power and Riteous Might, clerics make the best fighters. Ultimately, I think the spell was added to DDO for flavour as much as with the expectation of it being regularly used, but I do think that this is an example of how sticking too closely to PnP rules is a bad thing.

Angelus_dead
02-28-2008, 02:01 PM
The main limitation on DP clickies should be that the BAB caps at the spell's caster level (i.e. normally 7), making it distinctly less useful past level 9-10.
There are multiple ways DP clickies could be nerfed:
1. Delete them completely
2. Restrict them to providing BAB only up to caster level
3. Restrict them to only adding +1 BAB per 4 target HD, which is enough to bring a cleric to 1:1 BAB
4. Restrict them to only adding +1 BAB per 4 caster levels, enough to bring a cleric to 1:1 BAB

Any of those could work. I picked #3 because it would be the least nerf to other characters who may have come to enjoy DP clickies. Nerf #3 really only hurts characters with 1:2 BAB, who are the ones with Tenser's Transformation spells anyhow.



However, here DDO is following the PnP model, with little deviation, wherein clerics have the best self-buffs for melee.
Actually the wizard's Shapechange or Polymorph spells are better.

MysticTheurge
02-28-2008, 02:02 PM
The main limitation on DP clickies should be that the BAB caps at the spell's caster level (i.e. normally 7), making it distinctly less useful past level 9-10.

This is not the way Divine Power works. But as long as we're talking about making up rules for the clickies (such as capping the bonus at 1/4 your HD) this wouldn't be a bad thing to make up.

Angelus_dead
02-28-2008, 02:04 PM
This is not the way Divine Power works.
And command word magic items are not how Divine Power can be cast.

Any application of Divine Power to a magic item would be a house rule, and it would make eminent sense for the DM to take some of the assumptions inherent in a cleric spell (such as the caster already having 3:4 BAB to start with) and making them explicit to the magic item.

Placing DP on a clicky is already inventing new rules.

DSL
02-28-2008, 02:07 PM
As a slight digression, it is worth noting the circumstances of this spell's introduction into the game. Tenser was the character played by Gary Gygax's son, and it seems that the elder Mr. Gygax allowed his son to develop a few spells for hs own use, but with some severe limitations. Also amusing, is that the original spell description for Tenser's Floating Disk begins: "The wizard Tenser, always greedy for more treasure, devised this spell..."

DSL
02-28-2008, 02:19 PM
This is not the way Divine Power works. But as long as we're talking about making up rules for the clickies (such as capping the bonus at 1/4 your HD) this wouldn't be a bad thing to make up.


I am aware that this is not how it works in DDO or in PnP, but I am suggesting that this would be a logical limitation, much in keeping with the spirit of DDO clickies (which generally are very useful at low-mid levels, then much less so past level 10, and almost never scale so well with the users level).



And command word magic items are not how Divine Power can be cast.

Any application of Divine Power to a magic item would be a house rule, and it would make eminent sense for the DM to take some of the assumptions inherent in a cleric spell (such as the caster already having 3:4 BAB to start with) and making them explicit to the magic item.

Placing DP on a clicky is already inventing new rules.

You mentioned this before, but I'm unclear as to why. I see no reason why a use-activated wondrous item with this spell could not be created under DMG rules, but perhaps I am missing something, since my PnP campaigns severly downplay item crafting.

Angelus_dead
02-28-2008, 02:31 PM
You mentioned this before, but I'm unclear as to why. I see no reason why a use-activated wondrous item with this spell could not be created under DMG rules, but perhaps I am missing something, since my PnP campaigns severly downplay item crafting.
If you read it more carefully, you'll see there is no rule allowing any magic item not already listed in the DMG (or other sourcebook) to be created.

There are some guidelines to help the Dungeon Master appropriately house-rule the cost of homebrewed items, but there is not actually a "rule" allowing some magic item to be created by plugging the the spell level and daily charges into some formula. Everything related to that is advice only, and it spells out right there that the ultimate judgement must be made by the DM looking at how valuable the item is to characters.

rimble
02-28-2008, 02:37 PM
Everything related to that is advice only, and it spells out right there that the ultimate judgement must be made by the DM looking at how valuable the item is to characters.

Well...we have a DM...or, well...a team of them at least...so...?

DSL
02-28-2008, 02:38 PM
There are multiple ways DP clickies could be nerfed:
1. Delete them completely
2. Restrict them to providing BAB only up to caster level
3. Restrict them to only adding +1 BAB per 4 target HD, which is enough to bring a cleric to 1:1 BAB
4. Restrict them to only adding +1 BAB per 4 caster levels, enough to bring a cleric to 1:1 BAB

Any of those could work. I picked #3 because it would be the least nerf to other characters who may have come to enjoy DP clickies. Nerf #3 really only hurts characters with 1:2 BAB, who are the ones with Tenser's Transformation spells anyhow.

True enough, but at this point any nerfing would trigger a lot of complaints, so I don't think any of these are really viable.




Actually the wizard's Shapechange or Polymorph spells are better.

Shapechange is of course among the most powerful spells in the game, but at this point most spellcasters are better served relying upon spells than trying to outmelee the fighters. Polymorph is certainly very effective and versatile, but the Divine Power/Riteous Might combo is impressive considering how easy it is to use. Still, the assorted shapechanging spells all allow for some extreme benefits, and arguably abuse. Even Alter Self can allow a 3rd level caster to walk around with a +6 natural armor bonus (Troglodyte form), which can easily become unbalancing. I suppose that my point was that any cleric can very readily become a devastating melee'er, while a wizard has to plan and get creative to do so.

MysticTheurge
02-28-2008, 02:38 PM
Any application of Divine Power to a magic item would be a house rule, and it would make eminent sense for the DM to take some of the assumptions inherent in a cleric spell (such as the caster already having 3:4 BAB to start with) and making them explicit to the magic item.

Um... Right. Which is why I wrote that second sentence there.

I just wanted to make it clear that even if one thinks that's "how DP clickies should work" it can't be said that's how they should work because that's how the spell works. (Which the quoted statement could be misinterpreted to be saying.)

DSL
02-28-2008, 02:59 PM
If you read it more carefully, you'll see there is no rule allowing any magic item not already listed in the DMG (or other sourcebook) to be created.

There are some guidelines to help the Dungeon Master appropriately house-rule the cost of homebrewed items, but there is not actually a "rule" allowing some magic item to be created by plugging the the spell level and daily charges into some formula. Everything related to that is advice only, and it spells out right there that the ultimate judgement must be made by the DM looking at how valuable the item is to characters.

I would differ with you on this. While it's clear that DM's should consider any proposed item rather than simply checking the tables and allowing anything that seems to fit, there is a strong tone suggesting that DMs and players should be at least somewhat creative. The opening paragraph of the Wondrous item section begins:

"Wondrous items can be configured to do just about anything, from create a breeze to improve ability scores. Standard wondrous items are described below."

To me, this indicates that they expect people to come up with their own ideas, though an extensive list of pre-made examples are provided (much as the DMG list of potions is far from the complete list of potions that a brewer can create).

Once again, they don't intend for DMs to blindly allow anything that fits into the formula guidelines, but the formula tables are there because it's expected that players will do so, and expected that DMs will allow it to some extent.

MysticTheurge
02-28-2008, 03:01 PM
To me, this indicates that they expect people to come up with their own ideas

Yes, but his point is that once you do that, you're already making up the rules.

DSL
02-28-2008, 03:13 PM
Yes, but his point is that once you do that, you're already making up the rules.


Making up the rules? Not at all. Whether or not the item creation formulas are supposed to be strictly optional rules, the rules are there, and so it is a stretch to consider them "house rules". Now, I'm not saying that a DM should freely and automatically allow a Helm or Belt that the wearer can activate for a Divine Power spell 3 times/day simply because the formula exists, but the wondrous item creation rules leave the door open to a lot of possibilities that aren't included on the list of "standard wondrous items". After all, most of the craft item feats clearly allow for creating items that aren't listed on the DMG tables, so why not wondrous items?

Alavatar
02-28-2008, 03:14 PM
There are some guidelines to help the Dungeon Master appropriately house-rule the cost of homebrewed items, but there is not actually a "rule" allowing some magic item to be created by plugging the the spell level and daily charges into some formula. Everything related to that is advice only, and it spells out right there that the ultimate judgement must be made by the DM looking at how valuable the item is to characters.

Tonight I will check my DMG because I am fairly certain that there are rules that allow for the creation of custom magic items.

MysticTheurge
02-28-2008, 03:25 PM
Making up the rules? Not at all.

Well, yes you are, in the sense that everything is, at that point, a judgment call.

You're deciding whether a non-standard magic item is acceptable or not. And to that extent, you're making up the rules.

BlueLightBandit
02-28-2008, 04:01 PM
My rogue loves his Tenser's scrolls.

I have nothing else to add.

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 04:52 PM
My rogue loves his Tenser's scrolls.

I have nothing else to add.

Why wouldn't you just use free Divine Power clickies?

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 04:57 PM
Here's my take.

I can certainly empathize with those that do not like the current incarnation of divine power clickies. It's probably their rampant abundance that so seriously hurt the Tenser's spell.

But I'd like to come at it from another angle.

Are the divine power clickies overpowered in and of themselves? Compared to TT scrolls/spell, then absolutely. Compared to barbarian or ranger melee combat? Not at all. DDO is a world where DPS is actualy the key to taking down several big bosses. I'd take a barbarian or ranger over a paladin any day of the week up against the pit fiend. Sure the paladin has a few LOH, and might survive a bit longer without a cleric backing them up... but the paladin will end up taking more resources in the long run.

Now put in a strength based caster. They're no where near the DPS of a barbarian in that situation. The way I see it... those divine power clickies bring melee casters up to about the level of where they should be in PnP.

None of this is overly useful.. except to point out.... I can only see good that can result from Tenser's getting an upgrade without nerfing DP clickies. Simply making Tenser's prefferable in some situations would do it. There would be clearcut reasons to use a DP clickie or to use a Tenser's scroll if Tenser's more closely followed the Bladesworn Transformation.

That's just my take and point of view on it.

I think any change that would bring other classes more to the front line capacity would be a good thing.

DSL
02-28-2008, 05:03 PM
Well, yes you are, in the sense that everything is, at that point, a judgment call.

You're deciding whether a non-standard magic item is acceptable or not. And to that extent, you're making up the rules.

It's really more like deciding what rules to apply. It's more akin to deciding whether to allow some prestige class from a supplement than introducing some new home-brewed rule.

Alavatar
02-28-2008, 09:06 PM
So, here is what I found:

On page 282 of the DMG begins the section on Creating Magic Items. From page 282 to page 288 there are detailed instructions for the construction of magic items. No where in the section does it state or imply that custom magic items are at the DM's discretion. AND, as far as I am concerned, nearly everything in the game is at the DM's discretion. In fact, no where in Chapter 7 of the DMG does it say that the creation of magic items, custom or otherwise, is optional/house rule/whatever.

On page 284 is table 7-32 and on 285 is table 7-33. Table 7-33 details what effects you can place on a custom item, the base cost of the enchantment, and some modifiers. Table 7-32 details the cost of the imbued item if it duplicates a spell that requires a costly component or XP.

So, following those two tables, a Divine Power 3/day pair of bracers would be:

Use-activated
Spell level x caster level x 2000 gold

Charges per day
Divide by (5 divided by charges per day)

(4 x 7 x 2000)/(5/3) or 33600 gold and 1344 XP

No where in the entire section does it say this is not possible. It's just that the examples given are all magic items listed in the chapter. With these two tables it allows for players and DMs to be more creative within the confines of the rules. No rule was broken, bent, or bypassed in the creation of this DP 3/day item.

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 09:15 PM
And command word magic items are not how Divine Power can be cast.

Any application of Divine Power to a magic item would be a house rule, and it would make eminent sense for the DM to take some of the assumptions inherent in a cleric spell (such as the caster already having 3:4 BAB to start with) and making them explicit to the magic item.

Placing DP on a clicky is already inventing new rules.


And why not? I figure it as a wonderous item with a base value of 50400gp, Why exactly can DP not be put into an item, I don't notice any such restriction in the spell discription. But Here is the entry from the SRD maybe I am missing something...

Divine Power
Evocation
Level: Clr 4, War 4
Components: V, S, DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: 1 round/level
Calling upon the divine power of your patron, you imbue yourself with strength and skill in combat. Your base attack bonus becomes equal to your character level (which may give you additional attacks), you gain a +6 enhancement bonus to Strength, and you gain 1 temporary hit point per caster level.

Please tell me why exactly one would not be able to make a Command word activated Item using it?

Pellegro
02-28-2008, 09:21 PM
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e233/mcpine/RulesLawyers.jpg

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 09:23 PM
If you read it more carefully, you'll see there is no rule allowing any magic item not already listed in the DMG (or other sourcebook) to be created.

There are some guidelines to help the Dungeon Master appropriately house-rule the cost of homebrewed items, but there is not actually a "rule" allowing some magic item to be created by plugging the the spell level and daily charges into some formula. Everything related to that is advice only, and it spells out right there that the ultimate judgement must be made by the DM looking at how valuable the item is to characters.

I STRONGLY disagree with this, the Item creation rules are Core, and are NOT simply advice, like everything else they are subject to Rule 0 and I as a DM Rule 0 them quite often ( for example, there are no unlimited use command word wonderous items.) but that is not the rules as written.

Agian from the SRD:
CREATING MAGIC ITEMS
To create magic items, spellcasters use special feats. They invest time, money, and their own personal energy (in the form of experience points) in an item’s creation.
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item’s creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).
While item creation costs are handled in detail below, note that normally the two primary factors are the caster level of the creator and the level of the spell or spells put into the item. A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell. Using metamagic feats, a caster can place spells in items at a higher level than normal.
Magic supplies for items are always half of the base price in gp and 1/25 of the base price in XP. For many items, the market price equals the base price.
Armor, shields, weapons, and items with a value independent of their magically enhanced properties add their item cost to the market price. The item cost does not influence the base price (which determines the cost of magic supplies and the experience point cost), but it does increase the final market price.
In addition, some items cast or replicate spells with costly material components or with XP components. For these items, the market price equals the base price plus an extra price for the spell component costs. Each XP in the component costs adds 5 gp to the market price. The cost to create these items is the magic supplies cost and the base XP cost (both determined by the base price) plus the costs for the components. Descriptions of these items include an entry that gives the total cost of creating the item.
The creator also needs a fairly quiet, comfortable, and well-lit place in which to work. Any place suitable for preparing spells is suitable for making items. Creating an item requires one day per 1,000 gp in the item’s base price, with a minimum of at least one day. Potions are an exception to this rule; they always take just one day to brew. The character must spend the gold and XP at the beginning of the construction process.
The caster works for 8 hours each day. He cannot rush the process by working longer each day. But the days need not be consecutive, and the caster can use the rest of his time as he sees fit.
A character can work on only one item at a time. If a character starts work on a new item, all materials used and XP spent on the under-construction item are wasted.
The secrets of creating artifacts are long lost.




Please show me where anything is even implied that these are not Rules, but simply advise?

Just because an item is not explicitly listed does not mean that it's creation isa house rule, on the contrary forbiddiance would be more akin to a house rule (not that I find that a problem, I forbid items all the time).

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 09:26 PM
Yes, but his point is that once you do that, you're already making up the rules.

Ah but his point is wrong, you are only making up rules when you disallow an item, not when you allow it to be made by the charts.

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 09:33 PM
I thik the major problem here is the fact that clerics are simply the most powerful class in the game, and always have been. Divine power is of very dubious balance in a table top game and it's inclusion in DDO was probably a mistake, but you know, I am not a big fan of mummies with 1200 hp either, so it is probably in line with DDO's power level. Tensers is not, because it is a rather weak spell in it's current incarnation and so it transfers poorly to DDO where the power level is extremly high.

captain1z
02-28-2008, 09:49 PM
The only casters that would use this spell are the ones who are built with this spell in mind.

If as a caster your AC stands at 10 and you have 90hps........... then you did not build your caster with this spell in mind.

Much like the proper use of fireball and firewall, you may be weilding great power to the ends of getting yourself killed.

Crowd Control is great if you are speced for it
lightning and Acid is great if you are speced for it

If your 20 constitution wizard packs an extra mitheral shirt and a sword of shadows in his backpack before a quest............ then tensers may be the spell for you.

All others need not apply.


Clerics and paladins wear heavy armor and are intended to see front line action every now and then....... divine power aids them to this end.

Shield and MM clickies can be used by anyone as can DP clickies

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 10:05 PM
The only casters that would use this spell are the ones who are built with this spell in mind.

If as a caster your AC stands at 10 and you have 90hps........... then you did not build your caster with this spell in mind.

Much like the proper use of fireball and firewall, you may be weilding great power to the ends of getting yourself killed.

Crowd Control is great if you are speced for it
lightning and Acid is great if you are speced for it

If your 20 constitution wizard packs an extra mitheral shirt and a sword of shadows in his backpack before a quest............ then tensers may be the spell for you.

All others need not apply.


Clerics and paladins wear heavy armor and are intended to see front line action every now and then....... divine power aids them to this end.

Shield and MM clickies can be used by anyone as can DP clickies

Well, most casters built for Tensers would probably rely on Stoneskin and Displacement rather than actually invest in AC.

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 10:13 PM
Well, most casters built for Tensers would probably rely on Stoneskin and Displacement rather than actually invest in AC.

AC is virtually useless in higherlevel content. My caster runs with a AC in the 30's and that is only marginally better than 10 in the world of DDO, so I would agree, stone skin and displacement are good, still when using tensers I normally wear some +5 full plate just for some added protection.

MysticTheurge
02-28-2008, 10:15 PM
Are the divine power clickies overpowered in and of themselves?

In all probability, yes.

So are most clickies that don't have significant drawbacks (short duration, low DC, inferior results) for being cast at a low caster level.

If everyone was supposed to be able to cast spells, the rules would allow everyone to cast spells.

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 10:18 PM
In all probability, yes.

So are most clickies that don't have significant drawbacks (short duration, low DC, inferior results) for being cast at a low caster level.

If everyone was supposed to be able to cast spells, the rules would allow everyone to cast spells.

I agree, I think clickies in general are far too prevelent in DDO, of course I think the idea tha t+2 weapons should be available to 2nd level characters is kind of silly also.

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 10:22 PM
In all probability, yes.

So are most clickies that don't have significant drawbacks (short duration, low DC, inferior results) for being cast at a low caster level.

If everyone was supposed to be able to cast spells, the rules would allow everyone to cast spells.

See, I disagree. It doesn't give any sizeable bonus to real melee. It only serves to bring pseudo-melees into the realm of real melees.

I actually think it's a good thing with the way DDO is currently set up... and let's other classes at least contribute.

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 10:24 PM
I agree, I think clickies in general are far too prevelent in DDO, of course I think the idea tha t+2 weapons should be available to 2nd level characters is kind of silly also.

Agreeing that DDO is Monty Haul.. and agreeing that within that Monty Haul campaign, divine power clickies are even overpowered are two different things.

captain1z
02-28-2008, 10:29 PM
I agree, I think clickies in general are far too prevelent in DDO, of course I think the idea tha t+2 weapons should be available to 2nd level characters is kind of silly also.

I think people in general are silly and like to complain.

This past weekend after months of complaining that our PNP game makes it too hard to find a magical item our parties ranger was offered a reward of either a +2 admantine shield or a +1 shield of the ram. The 1st level ranger scoffed and said "thats it" and took the ram shield walking away disappionted. Mind you hes 1st level now after his last character (a 5th level fighter) killed himself because a tribe of barbarians wouldnt let him join them.

a bit off topic but the real world and DDO do have similarities.

winsom
02-28-2008, 10:34 PM
Tensers Transformation also gives the caster new weapon proficiencies. That alone could have served as a reason to cast Tensers rather than use Divine Power clickies, but then Turbine gave us the Master's Touch spell.

Master's Touch + Divine Power Clickies = Tensers Transformation for all the ways that it is important.

My wizard will never cast Tensers again. She only used it a few times and found it too underwhelming compared to Divine Power alone.

Class archetypical powers should never appear on clicky items that everyone can use, unless they are part of a very rare high level reward structure. Imagine a clicky with several charges of any of the following: Raise Dead, Heal, Stoneskin, Displacement, Death Ward, bardic fascination.. Divine Power is that good. It should never have been made into a clicky that we can all buy from the auction house.

I suggest that all Divine Power click items be changed to 1 use per rest or into Wands of Eternal Divine Power (with a high UMD).

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 10:35 PM
I think people in general are silly and like to complain.

This past weekend after months of complaining that our PNP game makes it too hard to find a magical item our parties ranger was offered a reward of either a +2 admantine shield or a +1 shield of the ram. The 1st level ranger scoffed and said "thats it" and took the ram shield walking away disappionted. Mind you hes 1st level now after his last character (a 5th level fighter) killed himself because a tribe of barbarians wouldnt let him join them.

a bit off topic but the real world and DDO do have similarities.


Well I know someone who would be excussed from my gaming group, unless of course it was an was simply character rolepleaying and the player never mentioned such things as the player.

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 10:38 PM
Agreeing that DDO is Monty Haul.. and agreeing that within that Monty Haul campaign, divine power clickies are even overpowered are two different things.

Well there is no agrument there certianly they are differant things, as I said in a previous post, Divine power transfers well to DDO tensers does not, still I find Clickies in general to have weakened the role of the Caster tremendously. This is tremendously evedent at lower levels.

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 10:49 PM
Well there is no agrument there certianly they are differant things, as I said in a previous post, Divine power transfers well to DDO tensers does not, still I find Clickies in general to have weakened the role of the Caster tremendously. This is tremendously evedent at lower levels.

Actually, this is 'only' evident at low levels.

Take DP for instance. The only people actually 'using' it in the first place are casters and the occasional rogue. (a few use it for the +6 str, but that's not as normal as before +6 items were ubiquitous.)

But anyways. A casters power simply isn't derived from buffs. If anything, these clickies have allowed mages to spend their sp on whatever they want.

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 11:00 PM
Actually, this is 'only' evident at low levels.

Take DP for instance. The only people actually 'using' it in the first place are casters and the occasional rogue. (a few use it for the +6 str, but that's not as normal as before +6 items were ubiquitous.)

But anyways. A casters power simply isn't derived from buffs. If anything, these clickies have allowed mages to spend their sp on whatever they want.

I disagree completly, I am astounded by the variety of clickies available to my party's rogue and fighter and paladin.
I keep hearing people say how much more powerful casters are than melees, but in my experiance that is simply not so. Not at 1st level, not at 8th level, not at 14th level. Melees power has been enhanced far more than people seem to realize, still I don't disagree with you that DP clickies are not there for pure melee classes, obviously they are not, still there are non divine casting classes which benifit from this spell a great deal more than Mages do.

However, I will say agian I don't have an issue with DP specificly it seems in keeping witht he power level of the game. I have issue witht he variety and prevelence of Clickies at all.

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 11:03 PM
I disagree completly, I am astounded by the variety of clickies available to my party's rogue and fighter and paladin.
I keep hearing people say how much more powerful casters are than melees, but in my experiance that is simply not so. Not at 1st level, not at 8th level, not at 14th level. Melees power has been enhanced far more than people seem to realize, still I don't disagree with you that DP clickies are not there for pure melee classes, obviously they are not, still there are non divine casting classes which benifit from this spell a great deal more than Mages do.

However, I will say agian I don't have an issue with DP specificly it seems in keeping witht he power level of the game. I have issue witht he variety and prevelence of Clickies at all.

Seriously? You don't think Sorcerers and the like are the undisputedly most powerful class?

That's odd to me.

Really just kinda odd.

My sorc isn't even on the same planet as my other 5 capped characters.

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 11:08 PM
Seriously? You don't think Sorcerers and the like are the undisputedly most powerful class?

That's odd to me.

Really just kinda odd.

My sorc isn't even on the same planet as my other 5 capped characters.

I think Sorcerers are far more powerful than Wizards, yet the general forum participent makes no distinction betweeen mages, but I don't think I would rate thm as the most powerful class, I think the Cleric is still the most powerful class, as it is in PNP. People are far to fixated on the kill counter, A cleric in DDO , just like the cleric in D&D can do it all, and heal himself while doing it.

bobbryan2
02-28-2008, 11:11 PM
I think Sorcerers are far more powerful than Wizards, yet the general forum participent makes no distinction betweeen mages, but I don't think I would rate thm as the most powerful class, I think the Cleric is still the most powerful class, as it is in PNP. People are far to fixated on the kill counter, A cleric in DDO , just like the cleric in D&D can do it all, and heal himself while doing it.

So can a WF sorc. ;)

And any other sorc with UMD and heal scrolls.

Elthbert
02-28-2008, 11:21 PM
So can a WF sorc. ;)

And any other sorc with UMD and heal scrolls.

Well The balance issues of warforged with out the roleplaying penalties assosiated with them in the eberron Campaign setting are a differant matter. But lets leave the sapiant constructs out of this as they disrupt the discussion of class power. Sorcerers are certianly vastly more powerful than wizards in DDO but a Cleric gets more, HP, a better BAB and easy access to a much higher AC, they can easily tank if needed, but can also lay down maximized blade barriers and insti-kill with the best of them, and heal themselves, without scrolls which cost thousands of gold a pop.

Geonis
02-28-2008, 11:25 PM
Why don't we see about making Tenser's better, rather than nerfing Divine Power.

And as to the "crafting a Divine Power clicky is against the rules", go get the Magic item Compendium. There are a lot of items with a number of uses per day, and it is condidered the easiest way to reduce the cost of an item.

Angelus_dead
02-29-2008, 12:55 AM
Please show me where anything is even implied that these are not Rules, but simply advise?
Those are not advice- those are rules. They are also rules that do not allow for any item not already listed in the book.

See this sentence, which you pasted yourself: "Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created."

You MUST meet the prerequisites in the description to create an item. If an item HAS NO description, you cannot meet the prerquisites, and you CANNOT create it.

That meaning is unambiguous. If the DM decides to allow players to submit new descriptions for magic items which their characters can later create, that's someplace where she must use good judgement. And that's also not just advice- the requirement to carefully judge each new item is a rule too. It's on page 282: "These two formulas aren't enough to truly gauge the exact difference between two very dissimilar items. Each of the magic items presented here was examined and modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. ... Use good sense when assigning prices."

Angelus_dead
02-29-2008, 01:03 AM
And as to the "crafting a Divine Power clicky is against the rules", go get the Magic item Compendium. There are a lot of items with a number of uses per day, and it is condidered the easiest way to reduce the cost of an item.
The Magic Item Compendium has no specific entry for an item which casts Divine Power on you. The DMG magic item creation rules only allow players to craft item which have an entry in some book.

Since you mention MIC, I'll take a minute to type in a sentence or two from it as a reminder that D&D does not have formulas to create magic items of arbitrary spells. Magic Item Compendium page 233: "the very nature of magic item design in D&D doesn't lend itself to hard and fast rules for setting these prices. Any two items that replicate different spells can, and probably should, vary dramatically in price, even if the spell level and caster level are identical."

Furthermore, I'll point out that if Divine Power items were allowed in D&D, they would be tremendously valuable to many characters, and particularly would be a MUST HAVE item for every monk. The lack of an item in any published book tells you a lot about how the designers felt about it's balance.

Angelus_dead
02-29-2008, 01:04 AM
I keep hearing people say how much more powerful casters are than melees, but in my experiance that is simply not so. Not at 1st level, not at 8th level, not at 14th level. Melees power has been enhanced far more than people seem to realize
Um, the level cap isn't 14, it's 16.

Xyfiel
02-29-2008, 02:51 AM
My main runs TT all the time except when I have to nuke or cc. I have no problems with it, and have not touched my DP clicky since Mod 4 came out.

I do have the spell memorized, and I have 52 AC twf or 55 s&s. It works as it is suppose to. If you have problems with DP or clickies in general, leave TT out of it.

Angelus_dead
02-29-2008, 02:53 AM
My main runs TT all the time except when I have to nuke or cc. I have no problems with it, and have not touched my DP clicky since Mod 4 came out.
Why do you do that?

MysticTheurge
02-29-2008, 07:01 AM
See, I disagree. It doesn't give any sizeable bonus to real melee. It only serves to bring pseudo-melees into the realm of real melees.

I actually think it's a good thing with the way DDO is currently set up... and let's other classes at least contribute.

But all the "pseudo-melees" are balanced to have 3/4 BAB. Giving them Full BAB whenever they want it, without having to expend any resources, is contrary to the balance of the system.

And that aside, looking at who might benefit from a DP clickie:

Clerics: Can cast DP.
Bards: Can UMD scrolls/wands of DP (or TT).
Rogues: Can UMD scrolls/wands of DP (or TT).
Wizards: Should be using TT.
Sorcerers: Should be using TT.

Angelus_dead
02-29-2008, 07:54 AM
And that aside, looking at who might benefit from a DP clickie:
You forgot monks from your list.

Which is a good point for why it is a good idea for Turbine to fix DP now:
Monks are the only 3/4 BAB class that neither has Divine Power as a known spell nor UMD as a class skill. Thus, they would benefit more than anyone else from DP clickies.

Any nerf coming to DP clickies should be done before monks start getting addicted to them.

bobbryan2
02-29-2008, 08:10 AM
But all the "pseudo-melees" are balanced to have 3/4 BAB. Giving them Full BAB whenever they want it, without having to expend any resources, is contrary to the balance of the system.

And that aside, looking at who might benefit from a DP clickie:

Clerics: Can cast DP.
Bards: Can UMD scrolls/wands of DP (or TT).
Rogues: Can UMD scrolls/wands of DP (or TT).
Wizards: Should be using TT.
Sorcerers: Should be using TT.

Yes, they are given a 3/4 BAB.

BUT... they don't have the ability to deal with increasing strength discrepancy in DDO. A caster might have a 14 strength, while a Fighter has 34. That's before the weapon focus feats, weapon enhancements and everything else.

Basically... to hits in this game are a lot higher than simply BAB. I realize it's not exactly canon... but it seems to me that the DP clickies get the other classes right where they need to be. Whereas in pnp.... DP will turn a cleric into a hell of a combatant. Here it turns you into a passable melee.

Ithrani
02-29-2008, 08:45 AM
First Tenser's is just fine, it is not meant for casters to use often. Actually it has become more of a special build spell in PnP where you buff to the gills and turn into a tank. Plenty of feats, prestige classes, and special armor properties allow a wizard to become a much more effective melee character.

DP clickes do not need to be nerfed because they have their limitations. They have a caster level and only work for that long which is fairly short. Wondrous magic items can have any effect you want at the caster level you want so whats the problem? You MT I am surprised are arguing against DP clickies as they seem to follow pnp rules just fine. Yes you don't have to allow players to create their own magic items you your PnP campaign but the variant rule is the DMG at the bottom of 214. But Turbine choses to allow magic items that would be similar to those created by players if that variant is in effect.

As for their value, a DP clickie wondrous item with 3 charges per day at 7th caster level activated by command word would cost about 30k GP or so and the rules are simple to create them. It follows the same rules as creating a boot of teleportation and only potions cannot carry "personal" spells.

DP is fine this game is overpowered anyway so who cares about balance. Rogues having the same BAB for under a minute still does not make them a better tank and if someone puts the time effort and backpack space into being non-melee class tank like a bard or a rogue or wizard and can do as good if not better a job then a straight fighter, more power to them. They earned it, this thread started with an invalid point and escalated into a debate over rules that are very fluid.

bobbryan2
02-29-2008, 08:52 AM
First Tenser's is just fine, it is not meant for casters to use often. Actually it has become more of a special build spell in PnP where you buff to the gills and turn into a tank. Plenty of feats, prestige classes, and special armor properties allow a wizard to become a much more effective melee character.

DP clickes do not need to be nerfed because they have their limitations. They have a caster level and only work for that long which is fairly short. Wondrous magic items can have any effect you want at the caster level you want so whats the problem? You MT I am surprised are arguing against DP clickies as they seem to follow pnp rules just fine. Yes you don't have to allow players to create their own magic items you your PnP campaign but the variant rule is the DMG at the bottom of 214. But Turbine choses to allow magic items that would be similar to those created by players if that variant is in effect.

As for their value, a DP clickie wondrous item with 3 charges per day at 7th caster level activated by command word would cost about 30k GP or so and the rules are simple to create them. It follows the same rules as creating a boot of teleportation and only potions cannot carry "personal" spells.

DP is fine this game is overpowered anyway so who cares about balance. Rogues having the same BAB for under a minute still does not make them a better tank and if someone puts the time effort and backpack space into being non-melee class tank like a bard or a rogue or wizard and can do as good if not better a job then a straight fighter, more power to them. They earned it, this thread started with an invalid point and escalated into a debate over rules that are very fluid.


I actually agree with most of that... except for Tenser's being fine. You say DP isn't overpowered... but somehow Tensers (which is far worse) is fine?

MysticTheurge
02-29-2008, 09:04 AM
I've always argued against DDO's clicky system.

Yes, there are some clickies in D&D, but it's an entirely different bucket of worms in DDO where you have unlimited access to treasure and can swap items out in less than a second.

Elthbert
02-29-2008, 09:21 AM
Those are not advice- those are rules. They are also rules that do not allow for any item not already listed in the book.

See this sentence, which you pasted yourself: "Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created."

You MUST meet the prerequisites in the description to create an item. If an item HAS NO description, you cannot meet the prerquisites, and you CANNOT create it.
That meaning is unambiguous. If the DM decides to allow players to submit new descriptions for magic items which their characters can later create, that's someplace where she must use good judgement. And that's also not just advice- the requirement to carefully judge each new item is a rule too. It's on page 282: "These two formulas aren't enough to truly gauge the exact difference between two very dissimilar items. Each of the magic items presented here was examined and modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. ... Use good sense when assigning prices."


Oh please that is absolutely absurd, that means exactly what it says, all items have prerequisites in their discriptions and one must meet them to make the item, it certianly does not say that no item without a discription can not be made, infact it gives one a detailed process on how to make unlisted items.
The very fact that it tells you that one must use good judgement in allowing magical items to be made indicates that indeed that makeing new ones is part of the Core game.

Oh and by the way, you were the one who siad they were advice perhaps you should choose your words more carefully.

Elthbert
02-29-2008, 09:25 AM
Um, the level cap isn't 14, it's 16.

The level cap has been 16 for too short a time to make any real conclusions regarding it. The fact that people seem to think arcane casters have been made vastly more powerful by the inclusion of those 2 levels is meaningless, in 3 or 4 months one might have and arguement, but not less than a month after the cap raise.

Elthbert
02-29-2008, 09:31 AM
I've always argued against DDO's clicky system.

Yes, there are some clickies in D&D, but it's an entirely different bucket of worms in DDO where you have unlimited access to treasure and can swap items out in less than a second.

Agreed. it is the unlimited treasure and swaping speed that really make it broken, in PNP one has to make decisions about magical items, particulalry those that have to be custom made, in DDO you do not, not really, treasure flows in this game like water out os a broken dam.

MysticTheurge
02-29-2008, 09:38 AM
Agreed. it is the unlimited treasure and swaping speed that really make it broken, in PNP one has to make decisions about magical items, particulalry those that have to be custom made, in DDO you do not, not really, treasure flows in this game like water out os a broken dam.

Also, for what it's worth, every "clicky" I can think of in D&D requires you to be wearing the item for the full duration of the effect it clicks to provide.

That is, you can't just hit your haste clicky or your shield clicky or your DP clicky and then go back to the item you really want to wear. In order to get the Haste effect from boots of speed or run up walls with your slippers of spider climbing, you have to be wearing them for as long as you want the effect.

bobbryan2
02-29-2008, 09:44 AM
The level cap has been 16 for too short a time to make any real conclusions regarding it. The fact that people seem to think arcane casters have been made vastly more powerful by the inclusion of those 2 levels is meaningless, in 3 or 4 months one might have and arguement, but not less than a month after the cap raise.

Actually.... casters lost some of their power when the cap was raised to 16. They were the absolute Gods of Mod 4 and 5 (especially after the Mod 5 metamagic changes).

And I would say you can make plenty of reasonable assumptions of the balance of power after a month of new content. Already you can see that melees are handy to have. Casters aren't even all that useful in Shroud... apart from casting dancing sphere and cloudkill with the occasional solid fog.

But I look back to one Crucible run I did. Was in a PUG with a party of 6. Crucible on elite. My sorc actually got every single kill in the quest. It was kinda fun. :) Granted the party helped me out by actuallly staying in one group and not getting lost... but still.

Elthbert
02-29-2008, 10:42 AM
Actually.... casters lost some of their power when the cap was raised to 16. They were the absolute Gods of Mod 4 and 5 (especially after the Mod 5 metamagic changes).

And I would say you can make plenty of reasonable assumptions of the balance of power after a month of new content. Already you can see that melees are handy to have. Casters aren't even all that useful in Shroud... apart from casting dancing sphere and cloudkill with the occasional solid fog.

But I look back to one Crucible run I did. Was in a PUG with a party of 6. Crucible on elite. My sorc actually got every single kill in the quest. It was kinda fun. :) Granted the party helped me out by actuallly staying in one group and not getting lost... but still.

Well I agree the metamagic change increased the power of spell casters conciderably, but I think it simply brought them up to the power of the Melee classes agian the sorcerers massive level of spell points does help them out in th epower department when compared to wizards.

Angelus_dead
02-29-2008, 12:06 PM
Oh please that is absolutely absurd, that means exactly what it says
It is not absurd, but you are correct: It means exactly what it says. Apparently you cannot tell what it says, even though it is spelled out even more explicitly in places like the magic item compendium.

Elthbert
02-29-2008, 12:16 PM
It is not absurd, but you are correct: It means exactly what it says. Apparently you cannot tell what it says, even though it is spelled out even more explicitly in places like the magic item compendium.

The Magic Item compendium? That is your defense for staying with in the rules?
The Magic Item Compendium is an optional book with optional rules, it is not Core at all. THe DMG does not support your position at all.

"Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created."
Does not mean only listed items can be created. That is simply NOT how English works all it means is what it says, for a listed item to be made it's prerequisites must be met. You have a faulty reasoning here. All monkeys are primates that does not mean all primates are monkeys, similarly that all listed items can only be made if there prerequsites are met does not mean that only things with listed prerequisites can be made. That is simply not the meanign or even a reasonable implication of those words.