How was the Wealth by Level chart constructed?


Rules Questions

701 to 750 of 1,112 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>

Khrysaor wrote:

If you'd quote the full paragraph as it reads, those rules are applicable to all characters of any level and then it gives the corresponding charts for characters of level 1 and then of higher than 1. How would you read this if you reversed the two sentences about level 1 and the higher than 1? The higher thans get gold and the lower thans roll dice? Its the same thing.

If you want to assume it has no reference to a character at higher than level 1 having gold then you have to assume all money is spent and no gold is kept. Since this is not the case there is a list of 'how' the money should be alloted on post level 1 characters. It also says in the last line of that paragraph how...

I didn't quote the whole paragraph because other's have, and I was responding to those.

You don't have to assume that all money is spent and none kept, the rules specifically suggest 10% be in normal gear and coin.

I agree a Player could choose to start play with their starting wealth in *all* coin ...and immediatly start crafting. I'd actually have no problem with that, since it would be in-game, and the adventure might have time issues what would make that tactic problematic.

The real question is do the rules say you can do that out of game, before you start play, in order to actually start with significantly more wealth than what the WBL chart says. The rules don't say that, people are just making the inference, and it's an inference that contradicts the rule itself - since by definition it means the PC would start play with more wealth than the rules say they can start play with.

Shadow Lodge

KrispyXIV wrote:

Hopefully, the attention this thread is generating will be a clear indication that this is an issue we'd really like clarification on :)

Hope springs eternal.


Asphesteros wrote:
Khrysaor wrote:

If you'd quote the full paragraph as it reads, those rules are applicable to all characters of any level and then it gives the corresponding charts for characters of level 1 and then of higher than 1. How would you read this if you reversed the two sentences about level 1 and the higher than 1? The higher thans get gold and the lower thans roll dice? Its the same thing.

If you want to assume it has no reference to a character at higher than level 1 having gold then you have to assume all money is spent and no gold is kept. Since this is not the case there is a list of 'how' the money should be alloted on post level 1 characters. It also says in the last line of that paragraph how...

I didn't quote the whole paragraph because other's have, and I was responding to those.

You don't have to assume that all money is spent and none kept, the rules specifically suggest 10% be in normal gear and coin.

I agree a Player could choose to start play with their starting wealth in *all* coin ...and immediatly start crafting. I'd actually have no problem with that, since it would be in-game, and the adventure might have time issues what would make that tactic problematic.

The real question is do the rules say you can do that out of game, before you start play, in order to actually start with significantly more wealth than what the WBL chart says. The rules don't say that, people are just making the inference, and it's an inference that contradicts the rule itself - since by definition it means the PC would start play with more wealth than the rules say they can start play with.

The rules then state that these values vary by character and concept. But we can ignore that since it said 10%.

From crafting. Money + time = item. Allowing them to have all that gold instead of items means you're forcing the time aspect to be done in game and that they've adventured for x time to get to where they are but that time isn't applicable for crafting. So they ran around naked with no weapons or gear for so many levels until they got to your campaign where they decided they would craft items.

Your real question is invalid. There is nothing in the rules that says you can't craft out of game just as there's nothing that says you can. Just because something isn't mentioned from either perspective doesn't mean you can assume one side is right.

Anyways good luck and godspeed. This thread is pointless.


But for the record. All I see is people that agree with crafting affecting wealth by quoting rules in their entirety and interpreting them vs the opposition that quotes where they like. To infer is to use common sense. This is what the devs expect of all of us.


Khrysaor wrote:

No, I read your entire post and that was my response to it. I saw what your point was in relation to someone else's post. My post was saying to read the statements from the book in their entirety so you don't feel like you're in the matrix.

Then you missed the point. Perhaps I was too wrapped up in trying to tell the story.

If you look at any given character progression, the grand total of wealth that has passed through your hands from 1-20 will be more than 880,000gp (assuming standard wbl). Between buying, selling, loss, usage, theft, or what-have-you, it strikes me as highly unlikely that my statement is wrong. You might (should) have about 880k worth of wealth at some point in your 20th level, but you'll have seen more than than.

Character creation doesn't care about the losses, the theft, the gains, or the SOURCE of those gains (or losses). All it describes is a way to make a character with the end result. I contend that all that matters at this point is the value of the item (and as I described, the source is irrelevant to the value). If the source is irrelevant to the value (found,created,bought), then how does any crafter justify to themselves and their group that the things they could create pre-game have a lower value than equivalent items acquired in any other fashion?

Quote:
Anyway I'm done with this thread. People are unreasonable and openly hostile.

Interesting. Buhbye. Maybe someone else will decide to answer the question.


Khrysaor wrote:
But for the record. All I see is people that agree with crafting affecting wealth by quoting rules in their entirety and interpreting them vs the opposition that quotes where they like. To infer is to use common sense. This is what the devs expect of all of us.

To infer is not necessarily using common sense. Work retail or food service for a bit to see that the two are not often related.

What I find interesting is that the only real point of contention is what "roughly equal" means. No one says that the WBL is so strict that you increase it when you level, like saves or Base Attack. Everyone agrees that it changes and sometimes it's a little different for each character.

Almost everyone agress that crafting should not be used to double the wealth of one character over another. The GM should put a stop to that at some point. That point varies from GM to GM.

Everyone seems to be in agreement that crafting, pre-game or not, can have an effect on what you have and the character's wealth.

What the biggest difference is that there are some who think that Market Value is how you compare wealth and others that think that the GM needs to take into account if the long sword +1 was crafted or not at every level.

This is where I say you must reasonably use the Market Value. a +1 long sword that was crafted, commissioned, or found, is still a +1 long sword and it's actual value doesn't change. Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth. Why would the devs assume that it should be any other way? How else would you figure out the wealth of a character? I don't track every gp the PCs ever get, and I doubt any GM does.


Christopher Fannin wrote:
If the source is irrelevant to the value (found,created,bought), then how does any crafter justify to themselves and their group that the things they could create pre-game have a lower value than equivalent items acquired in any other fashion?

If the GM allows it then that's all that's important. If he doesn't then it's not allowed, period. However, it's a point of "nifty" that makes roleplay sense and should be balanced as should any "GM allowed but rule-absent" thing.


Khrysaor wrote:
There is nothing in the rules that says you can't craft out of game just as there's nothing that says you can. Just because something isn't mentioned from either perspective doesn't mean you can assume one side is right.

But there IS a rule that says if you start play at X level your total wealth is Y.

Extrapolating what could make sense which contradicts an existing rule, and is not itself supported by a rule, is GM's discretion I beleive. I don't think there is a rule saying the GM has to let you use a feat before your character starts play (I think he can't, because then by defintion he'd have started already).

Your character could have had an estate which was sold for cash, leaving him with just the clothes on his back and a sack of money, however, so it's not unreasonable to just start with coin, and then craft in game to try to get the benefit (which may work or may not depending on the adventure). That's all just character background.

Bottom line as I see it, is the rules don't mandate what form your starting wealth must be in, but it does specify the total value it must have.

Owner - House of Books and Games LLC

TOZ wrote:
KrispyXIV wrote:

Hopefully, the attention this thread is generating will be a clear indication that this is an issue we'd really like clarification on :)

Hope springs eternal.

Why should any dev chime in on this? It's like chiming in on which XP progression is the "right" one. A GM can run it how they want, and that's how it should be.


I think people have forgotten how to read. Quoting myself from the 2nd post:

"Just to clarify, I'm not asking for dev input or rules on how much starting money can/should/must/whatever be put toward crafting. I'm simply asking if utilizing the craft mechanics should allow a character to exceed his WBL."


I liked where TOZ was going earlier, but think most people missed the point he was trying to make, so since I'm apparently an utter moron I'm going to jump into this thread and ask a simple question.

I have a character, he currently owns:
+1 Flaming Longsword
+2 Breastplate
Mithral Dagger
2x Potion of Speed
+1 Ring of Protection
+2 Amulet of Natural Armor
and 500 gp in coins and gems.

What is his current wealth with this equipment?


Bob_Loblaw wrote:
This is where I say you must reasonably use the Market Value. a +1 long sword that was crafted, commissioned, or found, is still a +1 long sword and it's actual value doesn't change. Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth. Why would the devs assume that it should be any other way? How else would you figure out the wealth of a character? I don't track every gp the PCs ever get, and I doubt any GM does.

Points to gunslinger, again.

I simply cannot fathom how you can say this and what you did earlier about the blunderbuss. "Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth." The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.


Buri wrote:

I think people have forgotten how to read. Quoting myself from the 2nd post:

"Just to clarify, I'm not asking for dev input or rules on how much starting money can/should/must/whatever be put toward crafting. I'm simply asking if utilizing the craft mechanics should allow a character to exceed his WBL."

I'm with you FYI - it's a little mysterious why some things get addressed and others not, seemingly regardless of how much discussion there is about it. Makes me think could be because there's so much discussion, they don't always want to take a stand on a controversial issue and risk alienating the other side.

Idilippy wrote:
What is his current wealth with this equipment?

sum of the market value of all that - as though the PC bought it for list price, not as if he sells it for half.


Buri wrote:
The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.

But they get a non-sellable unique to them version, though, right? It's not gear as much as a class feature, like Wizard's bonded object, or a Cavilier's mount.


Asphesteros wrote:


Idilippy wrote:
What is his current wealth with this equipment?

sum of the market value of all that - as though the PC bought it for list price, not as if he sells it for half.

Exactly, and I believe it adds up to about 26,000gp. It doesn't matter if he crafted it, found it on a dead enemy, had it given to him by a mentor, or bought it full price, the value of his wealth is the same, and if the DM says to build a character with 15,000gp in equipment this would not meet those requirements even if he had most of it crafted for half price because the value of the equipment would be far over the value the DM allows.


No GM has ever told me "buy x amount in gear." I've always just rolled a character and took my starting gold. What I do from there is my business. If the GM allows me to craft a couple items, I'll be over my WBL. If I wait and craft once play begins, I'll still be over my WBL. Difference? Convenience for the crafter.


Buri wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
This is where I say you must reasonably use the Market Value. a +1 long sword that was crafted, commissioned, or found, is still a +1 long sword and it's actual value doesn't change. Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth. Why would the devs assume that it should be any other way? How else would you figure out the wealth of a character? I don't track every gp the PCs ever get, and I doubt any GM does.

Points to gunslinger, again.

I simply cannot fathom how you can say this and what you did earlier about the blunderbuss. "Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth." The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.

This will probably get ignored, followed by the line "he can sell it for 4d10". Which magically reduces the market value.


idilippy wrote:
It doesn't matter if he crafted it, found it on a dead enemy, had it given to him by a mentor, or bought it full price, the value of his wealth is the same, and if the DM says to build a character with 15,000gp in equipment this would not meet those requirements even if he had most of it crafted for half price because the value of the equipment would be far over the value the DM allows.

That's how I read RAW, too. Yea. The debate is people arguing the character would have, before play started, taken that 15k in value and crafted it into the 26k. I don't think that kind of speculation or inference as to what would have happened before play starts works with RAW. Rule just says start with 15k value, and I think start with 15k value means start with 15k value. Then you see how it goes from there.


Buri wrote:
If I wait and craft once play begins, I'll still be over my WBL. Difference? Convenience for the crafter.

Depends on the adventure, often there's some urgency that precludes taking days or weeks (or even months when you talk about getting lots of scrolls made) to get prepped.

Smart GM would make that the cost to balance that benefit, too, forcing you to survive the early parts under-geared with the reward of toughing that out being you get to be overgeared later (for a time, until the rest of the rules kick in and he starts balancing the loot income down to equalise things to guidline levels again)


Asphesteros wrote:
Buri wrote:
The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.
But they get a non-sellable unique to them version, though, right? It's not gear as much as a class feature, like Wizard's bonded object, or a Cavilier's mount.

They can sell it, but only for 40 gp max. Also, it's just a normal MC item. You can improve it but you still need to make appropriate checks and pay as needed for those improvements as well.


Asphesteros wrote:
Buri wrote:
If I wait and craft once play begins, I'll still be over my WBL. Difference? Convenience for the crafter.

Depends on the adventure, often there's some urgency that precludes taking days or weeks (or even months when you talk about getting lots of scrolls made) to get prepped.

Smart GM would make that the cost to balance that benefit, too, forcing you to survive the early parts under-geared with the reward of toughing that out being you get to be overgeared later (for a time, until the rest of the rules kick in and he starts balancing the loot income down to equalise things to guidline levels again)

Sure. However, I would discuss this with the GM so there wouldn't be any surprises. Cuz, I do that. Talk wit muh GM an' all dat.


Tyki11 wrote:
Buri wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
This is where I say you must reasonably use the Market Value. a +1 long sword that was crafted, commissioned, or found, is still a +1 long sword and it's actual value doesn't change. Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth. Why would the devs assume that it should be any other way? How else would you figure out the wealth of a character? I don't track every gp the PCs ever get, and I doubt any GM does.

Points to gunslinger, again.

I simply cannot fathom how you can say this and what you did earlier about the blunderbuss. "Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth." The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.

This will probably get ignored, followed by the line "he can sell it for 4d10". Which magically reduces the market value.

What reduces the value isn't some line in the book, it's the fact that he does not have a blunderbuss. A blunderbuss could be used by anybody(with penalties if untrained), what the gunslinger starts with is a crappy collection of parts that he can manage to get to work most of the time, but for everyone else the weapon is broken and is likely to explode in their face or, if broken further by their inept wrangling, not work at all. It's exactly like a wizard's bonded item. A wizard can use his bonded item to cast a spell from his book spontaneously once per day, in the hands of everyone else it's just an object, another wizard can't use a different bonded item to cast a spell.

Quote:
No GM has ever told me "buy x amount in gear." I've always just rolled a character and took my starting gold. What I do from there is my business. If the GM allows me to craft a couple items, I'll be over my WBL. If I wait and craft once play begins, I'll still be over my WBL. Difference? Convenience for the crafter.

If your DM tells you, "use the WBL chart for a 10th level character" that doesn't mean you make a character with 62,000gp and can craft everything for 124,000gp worth of treasure. The core rulebook says: "Table 12–4 lists the amount of treasure each PC is expected to have at a specific level. Note that this table assumes a standard fantasy game. Low-fantasy games might award only half this value, while high-fantasy games might double the value."

The value of the treasure your character has doesn't change based on how you acquire the items, it is a static number based on the gp value of the items you have. Now, perhaps your campaign uses half WBL, or double WBL, that changes the actual numbers involved but not the fact that WBL is a total of value, not a gp amount that falls out of the sky along with your new character.

Anyways, this has been beaten to death, if you are determined to believe that your character should be able to double their wealth based on 1-2 feats, and your DM and other players are fine with this, that's great(no sarcasm, that really is great, different games work different ways and if it works for you it's not my or anyone's place to say you are doing it wrong in your campaign). I'll continue to interpret the rules in a way that doesn't nearly double the equipment of caster classes if they just take Craft Wondrous Item, because otherwise every caster has to take it, and all the APs I have will be rendered useless. Since I'm in Kingmaker it takes me enough time to modify the adventure for my players, if a replacement caster(and replacement with a crafter cohort) was double the wealth of the non-casters at the start it would be much, much more effort for them not to be able to overshadow all the other players.

Shadow Lodge

idilippy wrote:
Exactly, and I believe it adds up to about 26,000gp. It doesn't matter if he crafted it, found it on a dead enemy, had it given to him by a mentor, or bought it full price, the value of his wealth is the same, and if the DM says to build a character with 15,000gp in equipment this would not meet those requirements even if he had most of it crafted for half price because the value of the equipment would be far over the value the DM allows.

Pretty much. If the DM doesn't want a high-powered game, he's well within his right to ask the player to remove equipment until he's at the expected total.


Tyki11 wrote:
Buri wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
This is where I say you must reasonably use the Market Value. a +1 long sword that was crafted, commissioned, or found, is still a +1 long sword and it's actual value doesn't change. Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth. Why would the devs assume that it should be any other way? How else would you figure out the wealth of a character? I don't track every gp the PCs ever get, and I doubt any GM does.

Points to gunslinger, again.

I simply cannot fathom how you can say this and what you did earlier about the blunderbuss. "Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth." The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.

This will probably get ignored, followed by the line "he can sell it for 4d10". Which magically reduces the market value.

Why would he sell his class feature? Would you expect the wizard to sell his spellbook and bonded item? These characters would then be without the ability to function in their classes.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Tyki11 wrote:
Buri wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
This is where I say you must reasonably use the Market Value. a +1 long sword that was crafted, commissioned, or found, is still a +1 long sword and it's actual value doesn't change. Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth. Why would the devs assume that it should be any other way? How else would you figure out the wealth of a character? I don't track every gp the PCs ever get, and I doubt any GM does.

Points to gunslinger, again.

I simply cannot fathom how you can say this and what you did earlier about the blunderbuss. "Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth." The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.

This will probably get ignored, followed by the line "he can sell it for 4d10". Which magically reduces the market value.
Why would he sell his class feature? Would you expect the wizard to sell his spellbook and bonded item? These characters would then be without the ability to function in their classes.

A fighters sword is his class feature, a fighter without a sword is just as useless as a wizard without his spell book or the gunslinger without his crappy gun, don't see people reducing their wbl because he'll never sell it.

But hey, if you think that adding a "no one but you can use it" clause to an item makes it okey for you to ignore wbl, then that's a simple solution to pre-game crafting.


Tyki11 wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Tyki11 wrote:
Buri wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
This is where I say you must reasonably use the Market Value. a +1 long sword that was crafted, commissioned, or found, is still a +1 long sword and it's actual value doesn't change. Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth. Why would the devs assume that it should be any other way? How else would you figure out the wealth of a character? I don't track every gp the PCs ever get, and I doubt any GM does.

Points to gunslinger, again.

I simply cannot fathom how you can say this and what you did earlier about the blunderbuss. "Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth." The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.

This will probably get ignored, followed by the line "he can sell it for 4d10". Which magically reduces the market value.
Why would he sell his class feature? Would you expect the wizard to sell his spellbook and bonded item? These characters would then be without the ability to function in their classes.

A fighters sword is his class feature, a fighter without a sword is just as useless as a wizard without his spell book or the gunslinger without his crappy gun, don't see people reducing their wbl because he'll never sell it.

But hey, if you think that adding a "no one but you can use it" clause to an item makes it okey for you to ignore wbl, then that's a simple solution to pre-game crafting.

A fighter's sword is not a class feature. If you look over the class, the sword is not granted to any fighter simply because he is a fighter. The ability to use a sword, but not a sword.

The gunslinger's starting gun can only be used by him. Read the class description. It explicitly states this. Unlike the wizard's spellbook or bonded item, the gunslinger's gun does not function for anyone other than him. The wizard's bonded item is still a masterwork item and if it's a weapon can still function as a weapon for others. His spellbook can be used by others if they make the appropriate checks. These are still class features and do not count against the character's wealth. Spells beyond the initial and 2 freebies/level should count.


WBL stands for "wealth by level". It includes all wealth (property) owned by a character including spell books, swords, crafted items, etc.

It is a guideline. Given that the players are all equally skilled in the game, the GM should strive to keep wealth equal across players.

Usually, it's not a problem. The biggest abuse is during character creation. Some players try to cheat and break WBL then.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Usually, it's not a problem. The biggest abuse is during character creation. Some players try to cheat and break WBL then.

Who's cheating?

Shadow Lodge

People who try to spend over half their wealth on a single item when the DM has said no.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
People who try to spend over half their wealth on a single item when the DM has said no.

If that's the case, then I agree.


Or players who mis-apply the crafting rules so that they can have wealth significantly above the other characters at the table.

They fall into the same group of players as
1.) The player who claims that, due to his high charisma and social skills, his character was able to buy his gear at half price
2.) The player that claims that since his character stole all his gear, it doesn't actually count against his WBL
3.) The player that claims that his gear doesn't count against his WBL since his character didn't pay for it, rather he killed things and took their stuff.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Or players who mis-apply the crafting rules so that they can have wealth significantly above the other characters at the table.

I have yet to see an interpretation in this thread that fits your description of "mis-applying." All sides are readily supportable.


Ravingdork wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Or players who mis-apply the crafting rules so that they can have wealth significantly above the other characters at the table.
I have yet to see an interpretation in this thread that fits your description of "mis-applying."

Players will often go to any length in order to claim an unfair advantage for their character.

Here's the thing to ask. Crafting is a feat. Does having twice as much gear equal any of the other feats (except Leadership which has long been treated as a special case)?

No.


On the gunslinger thing as i stated before guns cost is not in any way reflective of their usefulness and are heavily inflated in cost.

Really outside of the class i can't see many people clammering to get their hands on weapons that not only fail more often but also then fail even more often and then explode.

The cost of guns comes from the percieved imbalance of a martial class targeting touch ac for 1gp a shot and and increased chance of blowing up.


Ravingdork wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Or players who mis-apply the crafting rules so that they can have wealth significantly above the other characters at the table.
I have yet to see an interpretation in this thread that fits your description of "mis-applying." All sides are readily supportable.

How about the roughly equal line. (yes i know this will vary from table to table but there has to be a limit on when having more wealth is no longer roughly equal)


idilippy wrote:
Tyki11 wrote:
Buri wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
This is where I say you must reasonably use the Market Value. a +1 long sword that was crafted, commissioned, or found, is still a +1 long sword and it's actual value doesn't change. Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth. Why would the devs assume that it should be any other way? How else would you figure out the wealth of a character? I don't track every gp the PCs ever get, and I doubt any GM does.

Points to gunslinger, again.

I simply cannot fathom how you can say this and what you did earlier about the blunderbuss. "Therefore it doesn't make sense to use any value other than Market Value to determine wealth." The blunderbuss has a market value of 2k gp. All other classes buy their weapons. The gunslinger gets this for free.

This will probably get ignored, followed by the line "he can sell it for 4d10". Which magically reduces the market value.

What reduces the value isn't some line in the book, it's the fact that he does not have a blunderbuss. A blunderbuss could be used by anybody(with penalties if untrained), what the gunslinger starts with is a crappy collection of parts that he can manage to get to work most of the time, but for everyone else the weapon is broken and is likely to explode in their face or, if broken further by their inept wrangling, not work at all. It's exactly like a wizard's bonded item. A wizard can use his bonded item to cast a spell from his book spontaneously once per day, in the hands of everyone else it's just an object, another wizard can't use a different bonded item to cast a spell.

Quote:
No GM has ever told me "buy x amount in gear." I've always just rolled a character and took my starting gold. What I do from there is my business. If the GM allows me to craft a couple items, I'll be over my WBL. If I wait and craft once play begins, I'll still be over my WBL. Difference? Convenience for the crafter.
If your...
Webster's English Dictionary wrote:

Treasure

Noun
1. A. Wealth (money, gems, or precious metals) stored up or hoarded.
B. A store of money in reserve.
2. Something of great worth or value.
3. A collection of precious things.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Or players who mis-apply the crafting rules so that they can have wealth significantly above the other characters at the table.
I have yet to see an interpretation in this thread that fits your description of "mis-applying."

Players will often go to any length in order to claim an unfair advantage for their character.

Here's the thing to ask. Crafting is a feat. Does having twice as much gear equal any of the other feats (except Leadership which has long been treated as a special case)?

No.

Yes.

Just cause you say "no" doesn't make it true. Depending on the character being made, I can think of a number of feats that would be just as worthwhile as a doubling of starting funds.

Also, you and others seem to be forgetting that it isn't a single feat investment. It often entails a feat AND a maxed out skill AND your funds to get the (small) bonuses that you guys are all up in arms about.


Ravingdork wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Or players who mis-apply the crafting rules so that they can have wealth significantly above the other characters at the table.
I have yet to see an interpretation in this thread that fits your description of "mis-applying."

Players will often go to any length in order to claim an unfair advantage for their character.

Here's the thing to ask. Crafting is a feat. Does having twice as much gear equal any of the other feats (except Leadership which has long been treated as a special case)?

No.

Yes.

Just cause you say "no" doesn't make it true. Depending on the character being made, I can think of a number of feats that would be just as worthwhile as a doubling of starting funds.

Also, you and others seem to be forgetting that it isn't a single feat investment. It often entails a feat AND a maxed out skill AND your funds to get the (small) bonuses that you guys are all up in arms about.

If your GM agrees with you, then great.

Personally, I'd like you to list the feats which you think are worth doubling your gear.


Let's be fair about the "investment." The characters that will benefit the most from crafting feats are casters. Wizards can call it a class feature if they take the feats as bonus feats. I have never seen (though I'm sure it can happen) a caster without ranks in Spellcraft. It's not really an investment any more than a rogue "investing" in Stealth.

As for the "double wealth" it can make a signifant difference. Let me ask this question: "If it isn't a significant difference, why are people arguing for it?" Obviously it is enough of a difference to be argued over.


Another nice line of thought. Similar to "if you're not guilty, why do you care if we search your home?" Right to privacy, friend. Similarly, not allowing crafting feats to work as they are clearly written is gimping a core mechanic to the game and cheating your players.


Buri wrote:
Another nice line of thought. Similar to "if you're not guilty, why do you care if we search your home?" Right to privacy, friend. Similarly, not allowing crafting feats to work as they are clearly written is gimping a core mechanic to the game and cheating your players.

Crafting feats are NOT clearly written to bypass WBL.

Crafting feats reduce the cost of making something, not the cost of having something.


As for the value of Crafting, because Crafting certainly does have value, it is in having custom items.

Instead of having to trade out items (eg. putting one item away in order to draw a different one with different powers), you can create a custom magic item which has the specific effects you want.

If you have a magic item that does
A.
B.
C.
and another one that does
D.
E.
F.
and your character likes to use
A.
B.
F.
he has to take time to put one item away and draw another one in combat - unless he has crafting and creates a custom item that does A, B, and F.


Follow me on a hypothetical for moment: The WBL for us both, because of our level, is 50k. As is we've both got about 35k in gear, 15k in gold. I'm a crafter and you're not. Are you saying I can't craft an item worth 30k gp because that would be put total gear value above 50k gp?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Personally, I'd like you to list the feats which you think are worth doubling your gear.

It's not doubling of gear (which would be broken), it's doubling of wealth. Due to item price scaling, a doubling of wealth (which it often isn't unless you invest even MORE feats) is NOT a powerful thing. Roughly equivalent to a +1 across the board.

As for your list, some of the following make or break a large variety of builds:

Augment Summoning. Deadly Aim. Extra Evolution. Intensified Spell. Leadership. Planar Preservationist. Power Attack. Preferred Spell. Quicken Spell. Sacred Summons. Scribe Scroll. Snap Shot line of feats. Spell Perfection. Spirited Charge. Spring Attack. Just to name a few.

This is not an exhaustive list. Depending on what kind of character you are making, anyone of these feats may well be more valuable then a +1 to AC, attack, damage, and saves.

Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Let's be fair about the "investment." The characters that will benefit the most from crafting feats are casters. Wizards can call it a class feature if they take the feats as bonus feats. I have never seen (though I'm sure it can happen) a caster without ranks in Spellcraft. It's not really an investment any more than a rogue "investing" in Stealth.

As for the "double wealth" it can make a significant difference. Let me ask this question: "If it isn't a significant difference, why are people arguing for it?" Obviously it is enough of a difference to be argued over.

Funny. I've seen plenty of spellcasters and rogues without Spellcraft or Stealth, respectively.

This game takes all types.


Buri wrote:
Follow me on a hypothetical for moment: The WBL for us both, because of our level, is 50k. As is we've both got about 35k in gear, 15k in gold. I'm a crafter and you're not. Are you saying I can't craft an item worth 30k gp because that would be put total gear value above 50k gp?

What I said is wrong is players using crafting to get significantly more wealth than everyone else at the table. I said that it isn't usually a problem, but that one place that it is more likely to be a problem is during character creation.

Personally, I think as long as you don't exceed the WBL of the next level (11th), you're probably okay. But, I'd base my decision, as a GM, on the two players relative skills as gamers. Primarily, I want to make sure that every character has an equal chance to shine.


Ravingdork wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
Personally, I'd like you to list the feats which you think are worth doubling your gear.

It's not doubling of gear (which would be broken), it's doubling of wealth. Due to item price scaling, a doubling of wealth (which it often isn't unless you invest even MORE feats) is NOT a powerful thing. Roughly equivalent to a +1 across the board.

As for your list, some of the following make or break a large variety of builds:

Augment Summoning. Deadly Aim. Extra Evolution. Intensified Spell. Leadership. Planar Preservationist. Power Attack. Preferred Spell. Quicken Spell. Sacred Summons. Scribe Scroll. Snap Shot line of feats. Spell Perfection. Spirited Charge. Spring Attack. Just to name a few.

This is not an exhaustive list. Depending on what kind of character you are making, anyone of these feats may well be more valuable then a +1 to AC, attack, damage, and saves.

Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Let's be fair about the "investment." The characters that will benefit the most from crafting feats are casters. Wizards can call it a class feature if they take the feats as bonus feats. I have never seen (though I'm sure it can happen) a caster without ranks in Spellcraft. It's not really an investment any more than a rogue "investing" in Stealth.

As for the "double wealth" it can make a significant difference. Let me ask this question: "If it isn't a significant difference, why are people arguing for it?" Obviously it is enough of a difference to be argued over.

Funny. I've seen plenty of spellcasters and rogues without Spellcraft or Stealth, respectively.

This game takes all types.

Doubling of wealth IS doubling of gear (unless the PC takes the wealth out of the game - perhaps by building orphanages in all the towns he visits).

And none of the feats you listed are worth doubling of gear.


You've clearly never played a class dependent on them, then. Also, doubling of wealth is not doubling of gear. A +1 enhancement costs 2,000 gp, +2 is 8,000 gp, +3 is 18,000 gp, +4 is 32,000 gp, +5 is 50,000 gp. Given you have to have a level 3 times that of an enhancement to craft it on a weapon or piece of armor, doubling money does NOT double gear and by extension does not double power.

701 to 750 of 1,112 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / How was the Wealth by Level chart constructed? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.