Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Creating magical item for the party + small fee on the work = players uprorar?


Advice

1,201 to 1,250 of 2,075 << first < prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | next > last >>

Selgard wrote:
Hivemind.

If you want to play the good of the many then fine but by that logic it's a good idea to drop fireballs on your ally to hit all the enemies and I think anyone you did that to would turn around and punch you in the face sooooo yeah. After all the fireball dropped on that fighter saves 4 of you from potential danger how could that possibly not be a good idea?

Players get one PC, they control that one PC, that's how the game works. I don't tell the fighter that he grapples this guy instead of swinging his sword and he doesn't tell me I craft items for free instead of for 10%. If you don't want any individuality in your games and want to collectively decide everything I guess that works for you guys if you all like it but it should never be the assumed method of play.


Gauss wrote:
Selgard wrote:
One guy on the forum said that every 2-3 levels he WBL audits the characters and shores up the poor and knocks down the rich.

Just to clarify, I don't knock down the rich. In 7 levels of the current campaign Im running Ive had to make an adjustement exactly once. I gave everyone an item during an RP encounter (rather than as loot) but each item had a different GP value. It brought them closer together although they do not have exactly the same value. Every 2-3 levels is about every 6weeks for us and takes only a few minutes for my players to give me a copy of their equipment. - Gauss

Edit: P.S. In our group we decide house rules and major things like how to deal with this problem as a group. I do not rule by DM fiat. I see my role as DM as a facilitor rather than as 'GOD' although we do make the obligatory jokes that I am GOD (either the deity or Game Operations Director, take your pick).

I had thought someone said they did very frequent audits and adjusted the rich down and the poor up.. Not sure it was you- not saying it was. it was just a general statement. (not wading through 500 posts to find it either lol :) )

Our Dm does it the same as you though- we all discuss and contribute to houserule discussions. The final decision is usually his (since he's more worried about the campaign and we're a lil more concerned with us lol) but its all discussed. I was in a campaign where the DM just said "here are the houserules". 4 of the guys quit immediately (claiming real life obligations that took them away from the game for a time) and the remaining 2 of us didn't last long after that.
They could really have had real time obligations. I dunno. But it seemed peculiar.

At some point I suppose the DM Could be the tie breaker even in someting that should be left to the group. That still leaves the "odd man out" in the position of going along with it, being a jerk, or leaving the group though. Either "DM says evil only, sorry" or "Dm says good only, no evil guys" or "DM says crafters can't charge the party " or "DM says the crafters charge 20%".
The end result is really the same for the guy who disagrees.
1) suck it up and play anyway
2) leave the group
3) find some way to play with the party without it bugging you.
Maybe you become a crafter and skip the 10% altogether.
maybe you decide not to be a crafter if you can't take 10%.
Maybe yuo pretend that phantom 50% is beign donated to your church (rather than getting charged to his WBL while not actually being spent. which is still weird lol)

Whether its the DM or the party saying it, the result is the same for the player.

-S


Selgard, perhaps it was the 2-3 level statement as I made that statement on this thread awhile back that triggered my response. No worries though, I didn't take it badly. I just wanted to clarify it. - Gauss


Selgard wrote:

Our Dm does it the same as you though- we all discuss and contribute to houserule discussions. The final decision is usually his (since he's more worried about the campaign and we're a lil more concerned with us lol) but its all discussed. I was in a campaign where the DM just said "here are the houserules". 4 of the guys quit immediately (claiming real life obligations that took them away from the game for a time) and the remaining 2 of us didn't last long after that.
They could really have had real time obligations. I dunno. But it seemed peculiar.

At some point I suppose the DM Could be the tie breaker even in someting that should be left to the group. That still leaves the "odd man out" in the position of going along with it, being a jerk, or leaving the group though. Either "DM says evil only, sorry" or "Dm says good...

You can say that but when the DM says it he usually has a valid reason other than get your hands off MY PRECIOUS SHINIES RAWRWWGHGH.

Or the DM says "You know what, I like your idea and I want you to enjoy this game, for this game you can ignore the bit about the Paladin's code regarding traveling with evil people as long as you're trying to reform them IC."

Or the DM says, "I understand where your concerns are coming from this is a serious issue and to get the right balance you should have more gold to work with. How about this guys, you can either pay X% fee (per math to make it right), or we can say you're paying a fee but not actually act as though you are and I'm just going to add X gold to Cindy's pockets to work with, or you can accept that Cindy as a character wouldn't craft for free and just deal with the loot drops that I give you guys, or you can try to talk Cindy into crafting for free for you guys but I'll still give her the extra gold for her personal use. So mechanically there will be no difference are you still really that pissed about this?"


gnomersy wrote:
Selgard wrote:
Hivemind.

If you want to play the good of the many then fine but by that logic it's a good idea to drop fireballs on your ally to hit all the enemies and I think anyone you did that to would turn around and punch you in the face sooooo yeah. After all the fireball dropped on that fighter saves 4 of you from potential danger how could that possibly not be a good idea?

Players get one PC, they control that one PC, that's how the game works. I don't tell the fighter that he grapples this guy instead of swinging his sword and he doesn't tell me I craft items for free instead of for 10%. If you don't want any individuality in your games and want to collectively decide everything I guess that works for you guys if you all like it but it should never be the assumed method of play.

Its not a hive-mind everyone controls everyone.

I made my PC. I did it entirely without the group's help. (except for one oddity that I proposed a houserule for, and got accepted).

The fighter did the same (exact same actually- he had to propose a house rule too- and got it accepted)

The cleric did. (no houserule needed)
the rogue, the wizard,the magus, the ranger.. everyone made their characters themselves without group input or oversight. Not that we don't occasioally ask for each others advice- but its just that. Advice.

We are a largely good group though. If the magus coming in was evil, he'd have an issue. And we'd tell him that. he'd have a serious issue in our group, such that his character would need to not be evil to join us.

I feel relatively safe in saying that a crafter coming in thinking he was gonna charge 10% would be in the same boat. Its just not acceptable. Its not in the bounds of what we find acceptable for someone trying to join our group to do.
By that same light, if you wanted to come in and be a mass murdering psychopath who killed everything you came across without deliberation or reason- just killing because it consumed oxygen. The group wouldn't put up with that.

A new campaign comes up. Several people ask the DM about playing an evil group. The DM says he's fine with that. they could use a change of pace from playing goody two shoes all the time. One guy says but.. he'd really rather play a paladin this time than a fighter.
At some point, someone isn't getting to runthe character they wanted.
How do you resolve it? Do the evil guys never get an evil campaign because 1 guy doesn't like playing evil?
Maybe so. That seems awfully selfish of that one guy though to continually bend the group to what he wants.

The same is true regardless of what the scenario is. the odd man out can be the guy who wants to charge 10%. or the guy who thinks 10% is theft. or whatever.

How does your group handle the odd man out? The guy who dosn't like what everyone else is doing, and thinks it should be done Y instead of Y?
When the group and an odd man out conflict, who wins?

-S


Selgard wrote:
^

See the post above this for how I'd handle the odd man out in my groups.


gnomersy wrote:
Selgard wrote:

Our Dm does it the same as you though- we all discuss and contribute to houserule discussions. The final decision is usually his (since he's more worried about the campaign and we're a lil more concerned with us lol) but its all discussed. I was in a campaign where the DM just said "here are the houserules". 4 of the guys quit immediately (claiming real life obligations that took them away from the game for a time) and the remaining 2 of us didn't last long after that.
They could really have had real time obligations. I dunno. But it seemed peculiar.

At some point I suppose the DM Could be the tie breaker even in someting that should be left to the group. That still leaves the "odd man out" in the position of going along with it, being a jerk, or leaving the group though. Either "DM says evil only, sorry" or "Dm says good...

You can say that but when the DM says it he usually has a valid reason other than get your hands off MY PRECIOUS SHINIES RAWRWWGHGH.

Or the DM says "You know what, I like your idea and I want you to enjoy this game, for this game you can ignore the bit about the Paladin's code regarding traveling with evil people as long as you're trying to reform them IC."

Or the DM says, "I understand where your concerns are coming from this is a serious issue and to get the right balance you should have more gold to work with. How about this guys, you can either pay X% fee (per math to make it right), or we can say you're paying a fee but not actually act as though you are and I'm just going to add X gold to Cindy's pockets to work with, or you can accept that Cindy as a character wouldn't craft for free and just deal with the loot drops that I give you guys, or you can try to talk Cindy into crafting for free for you guys but I'll still give her the extra gold for her personal use. So mechanically there will be no difference are you still really that pissed about this?"

So basically he can houserule a solution. I guess that works. he gets to try to be all goody goody while watching the other 5 guys kill maim and butcher the (other) good guys in the world to get what they want.

If it works for the group, why not?

Or the DM says:
Man the WBL rules are stupid as hell and that clarification didn't much clarify anything. If the group (insert however the group feels about 10% here) then go with it, and I'll just keep tabs on WBL from my side of the screen and make sure no one is getting screwed. I really don't think its my job to tell you guys how to handle it. Its up to you."

The fact still remains:
When there is conflict in the group, and the group says X and one guy says Y, either the group lets them selves be led by Y, or they tell the one guy to fall in line. Its really their choice.

One guy doesn't get to say "but I'm Y you have to do what I say". Because yanno.. they really don't. they have options aside from "do it his way". They are just options that he doesn't like.
And that they may not like either. But if they feel strongly enough about it, and he does too, it may just come down to that.

Otherwise you have one character who is dictating the actions of the group. he says 'I want X, so its X, too bad for you all, its my character concept/decision/whatever and you hve to go along with it".

I just don't go with that. One guy doesn't get to be Dictator Dan for the party. Even if he thinks he's right.

-S


Selgard wrote:
gnomersy wrote:
Selgard wrote:
Hivemind.

If you want to play the good of the many then fine but by that logic it's a good idea to drop fireballs on your ally to hit all the enemies and I think anyone you did that to would turn around and punch you in the face sooooo yeah. After all the fireball dropped on that fighter saves 4 of you from potential danger how could that possibly not be a good idea?

Players get one PC, they control that one PC, that's how the game works. I don't tell the fighter that he grapples this guy instead of swinging his sword and he doesn't tell me I craft items for free instead of for 10%. If you don't want any individuality in your games and want to collectively decide everything I guess that works for you guys if you all like it but it should never be the assumed method of play.

Its not a hive-mind everyone controls everyone.

I made my PC. I did it entirely without the group's help. (except for one oddity that I proposed a houserule for, and got accepted).

The fighter did the same (exact same actually- he had to propose a house rule too- and got it accepted)

The cleric did. (no houserule needed)
the rogue, the wizard,the magus, the ranger.. everyone made their characters themselves without group input or oversight. Not that we don't occasioally ask for each others advice- but its just that. Advice.

We are a largely good group though. If the magus coming in was evil, he'd have an issue. And we'd tell him that. he'd have a serious issue in our group, such that his character would need to not be evil to join us.

I feel relatively safe in saying that a crafter coming in thinking he was gonna charge 10% would be in the same boat. Its just not acceptable. Its not in the bounds of what we find acceptable for someone trying to join our group to do.
By that same light, if you wanted to come in and be a mass murdering psychopath who killed everything you came across without deliberation or reason- just killing because it consumed oxygen. The...

Selgard, if am i understanding this correctly, are you saying that either side of the argument is fine, as long as everyone agrees to it beforehand?

That is coming dangerously close to the kind of answer that EVERYONE might be able to agree with! And it needs to stop NOW! :)


Banatine wrote:

Selgard, if am i understanding this correctly, are you saying that either side of the argument is fine, as long as everyone agrees to it beforehand?

That is coming dangerously close to the kind of answer that EVERYONE might be able to agree with! And it needs to stop NOW! :)

oops!

I meant to say.
MY WAY OR THE HIGH WAY! GET OUT OF MY GROUP JERKS!
or something..
right? lol

:)

The thread.. must.. continue!

Though I think its pretty much dead. We're largely arguing semantics. We're never gonna agree on how a group should come to a decision- It hink we all do agree though that the group should come to some decision. Whatever mechanism your group uses to get along, is the right one.

We've gone from crafters getting extra to alignment tangles and are now just talking about how your own group works things out.

Love to see 2k posts, but I think we're mostly done here .

-S


Selgard wrote:

So basically he can houserule a solution. I guess that works. he gets to try to be all goody goody while watching the other 5 guys kill maim and butcher the (other) good guys in the world to get what they want.

If it works for the group, why not?
Or the DM says:
Man the WBL rules are stupid as hell and that clarification didn't much clarify anything. If the group (insert however the group feels about 10% here) then go with it, and I'll just keep tabs on WBL from my side of the screen and make sure no one is getting screwed. I really don't think its my job to tell you guys how to handle it. Its up to you."

The fact still remains:
When there is conflict in the group, and the group says X and one guy says Y, either the group lets them selves be led by Y, or they tell the one guy to fall in line. Its really their choice.

One guy doesn't get to say "but I'm Y you have to do what I say". Because yanno.. they really don't. they have options aside from "do it his way". They are just options that he doesn't like.
And that they may not like either. But if they feel strongly enough about it, and he does too, it may just come down to that.

Otherwise you have one character who is dictating the actions of the group. he says 'I want X, so its X, too bad for you all, its my character concept/decision/whatever and you hve to go along with it".

I just don't go with that. One guy doesn't get to be Dictator Dan for the party. Even if he thinks he's right.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander you said that iirc. So if you get to tell somebody else that they do X, then they get to tell you that you do Y aka eat fireballs "For great justice!"

As for the group of murderers sure they could do that or they could be like
Group: Man lets play an evil group this time around.

Player 1:I was hoping to play a pally this time though ... crap.

Group: Nah it's cool bud how about instead of being random psychotic murderers we play as a crew of morally ambiguous Mercs for hire or a crew of legally sanctioned "counter-terrorist" squad that acts like anything they do is justice and you can try to convince us to reform our ways and convince the feds to change the laws.

Player 1: Wouldn't that still violate blah?

DM: Eh whatever it's cool by me just don't be actively murder-y yourself and I'll allow it.

Player 1: Thanks guys that's awesome!

Group: No big I mean we're friends right seems only fair to let you get your character idea it's not like it actually affects us other than a tiny fluff change.


Selgard wrote:
Benly wrote:
Wow, I skip out on the thread for 250 posts and the same dude is making the same straw-man accusations about anyone who doesn't agree with his specific POV. Way to go, chief. You keep fighting the good fight.

Not entirely sure what you are referring to. Neither side is making a strawman argument. We're just discussing how we think things should work and be run.

-S

I've gone ahead and tabulated posting to this thread since the 1000th postiversary. I apologize in advance if any of the single posters disagree with their camp placement - I read through individual posts but always misunderstanding is possible.

The following are the top ten posters to the thread (208 posts, 113 pro-thievery, 95 pro-slavery)

# Posts % total conversation % of arguments of that camp Name Camp
46p 22% 48% Selgard (slavery)
26p 13% 27% Adamantine Dragon (slavery)
17p 08% 15% Doram ob'Han (thievery)
16p 08% 17% dragonfire8974 (slavery)
14p 07% 12% Jak the Looney Alch. (thievery)
12p 06% 11% gnomersy (thievery)
10p 05% 09% MistWalker (thievery)
08p 04% 07% QuantumSteve (thievery)
07p 03% 06% Buri (thievery)
07p 03% 06% Diego Rossi (thievery)

Broken down by camp:

Above-the-fray types aka Why-the-heck-is-this-thread-still-going-on-ites:
Gauss (6), banatine (6), ringtail (1), benly (1)

Pro-Thievery:
Doram ob'Han (17), Jak the Looney Alchemist (14), gnomersy (12), Mistwalker (10), QuantumSteve (8), Buri (7), DiegoRossi (7), beej67 (4), ZugZug (3), Ravingdork (3), Humphrey Boggard (3), Starbuck_II (3), Obirandiath (1), Remco Sommeling (1), ArtemisMonster (1), Ferio (1), Nevarre (1), Realmwalker (1), Robespierre (1), ChristopherDudley (1)

Pro-Slavery:
Selgard (46), Adamantium Dragon (26), dragonfire8974 (16), Kyoni (2), Khrysar (1), Dr Grecko (1), Master Arminas (1), TheBlackRaven (1), Maxximillus (1)

Math is fun!


gnomersy wrote:
Selgard wrote:

So basically he can houserule a solution. I guess that works. he gets to try to be all goody goody while watching the other 5 guys kill maim and butcher the (other) good guys in the world to get what they want.

If it works for the group, why not?
Or the DM says:
Man the WBL rules are stupid as hell and that clarification didn't much clarify anything. If the group (insert however the group feels about 10% here) then go with it, and I'll just keep tabs on WBL from my side of the screen and make sure no one is getting screwed. I really don't think its my job to tell you guys how to handle it. Its up to you."

The fact still remains:
When there is conflict in the group, and the group says X and one guy says Y, either the group lets them selves be led by Y, or they tell the one guy to fall in line. Its really their choice.

One guy doesn't get to say "but I'm Y you have to do what I say". Because yanno.. they really don't. they have options aside from "do it his way". They are just options that he doesn't like.
And that they may not like either. But if they feel strongly enough about it, and he does too, it may just come down to that.

Otherwise you have one character who is dictating the actions of the group. he says 'I want X, so its X, too bad for you all, its my character concept/decision/whatever and you hve to go along with it".

I just don't go with that. One guy doesn't get to be Dictator Dan for the party. Even if he thinks he's right.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander you said that iirc. So if you get to tell somebody else that they do X, then they get to tell you that you do Y aka eat fireballs "For great justice!"

As for the group of murderers sure they could do that or they could be like
Group: Man lets play an evil group this time around.

Player 1:I was hoping to play a pally this time though ... crap.

Group: Nah it's cool bud how about instead of being random psychotic murderers we play as a crew of morally ambiguous Mercs for...

1) cept its not "me telling them" anything. I'm not talking about King Selgard dictating to the other guy what to do.

I'm talking about the group as a whole having what they consider to be the right way to do it, ensuring that the group behaves that way.

If its a good aligned group, folks keep good alignments and behave like it. If the group says 10% is acceptable- then its acceptable. If the group says no charge, then its no charge.
Its not about dictator Dan making some other party member bow to its wishes, its about party cohesion and the party behaving like a party.

Evil and the paladin and all that: I don't disagree that it could work that way. The issue is when it doesn't.
Paladin wants to play a paladin not a guy who's too stupid to see the evil under his face (even with the DM allowing it) and the evil guys want to play evil not morally ambiguous characters who are trying to hide it from their "party member".

I totally agree that everyone can fold and no one gets what they wanted. But what if they don't want to fold and no one get what they want? Does the one guy get to hold the group hostage? I get what you are saying for the lone guy's stand point. it would suck to be the guy who hates playing evil when the rest of the group does. But what does he do when everyone else wants to run an evil campaign? Force them to never, ever get to run one, because he said so?

If the group decides X- whatever X happens to be, its not on any one member to say "I didn't vote for X I don't like X and screw yuo all I'm not going to abide by it"

There has to be some kind of tie breaker. And what the majority of them want to do with the campaign should be that tie breaker.
of course, if its half the group wanting X and half Y, then there are other issues. Maybe they should just do something else entirely so no one gets screwed.

At some point the group has to work as a group and look out for the interests as a group,a nd this is going to run counter to everyone looking out for themselves personally. But it is something that you give up to join the group- that 100% always me first mentality. Thats what being a group is all about.

Hopefully everyone can work things out. I completely agree.
But absent that, then the group should do what the group thinks is best, as opposed to what any individual thinks should happen.

-S


Humphrey Boggard wrote:
Selgard wrote:
Benly wrote:
Wow, I skip out on the thread for 250 posts and the same dude is making the same straw-man accusations about anyone who doesn't agree with his specific POV. Way to go, chief. You keep fighting the good fight.

Not entirely sure what you are referring to. Neither side is making a strawman argument. We're just discussing how we think things should work and be run.

-S

I've gone ahead and tabulated posting to this thread since the 1000th postiversary. I apologize in advance if any of the single posters disagree with their camp placement - I read through individual posts but always misunderstanding is possible.

The following are the top ten posters to the thread (208 posts, 113 pro-thievery, 95 pro-slavery)

# Posts % total conversation % of arguments of that camp Name Camp
46p 22% 48% Selgard (slavery)
26p 13% 27% Adamantine Dragon (slavery)
17p 08% 15% Doram ob'Han (thievery)
16p 08% 17% dragonfire8974 (slavery)
14p 07% 12% Jak the Looney Alch. (thievery)
12p 06% 11% gnomersy (thievery)
10p 05% 09% MistWalker (thievery)
08p 04% 07% QuantumSteve (thievery)
07p 03% 06% Buri (thievery)
07p 03% 06% Diego Rossi (thievery)

Broken down by camp:

Above-the-fray types aka Why-the-heck-is-this-thread-still-going-on-ites:
Gauss (6), banatine (6), ringtail (1), benly (1)

Pro-Thievery:
Doram ob'Han (17), Jak the Looney Alchemist (14), gnomersy (12), Mistwalker (10), QuantumSteve (8), Buri (7), DiegoRossi (7), beej67 (4), ZugZug (3), Ravingdork (3), Humphrey Boggard (3), Starbuck_II (3), Obirandiath (1), Remco Sommeling (1), ArtemisMonster (1), Ferio (1), Nevarre (1), Realmwalker (1), Robespierre (1), ChristopherDudley (1)

Pro-Slavery:
Selgard (46), Adamantium Dragon (26), dragonfire8974 (16), Kyoni (2), Khrysar (1), Dr Grecko (1), Master Arminas (1), TheBlackRaven (1), Maxximillus (1)

Math is fun!

Thanks for the laugh :)

-S


Humprey Boggard: I laughed also at this. However, I am not asking why the heck is this thread still going on.

The third camp (admitedly a minority) should be called the WBL balance camp. I nominate myself leader of the camp...all hail the leader! J/K. :D

- Gauss


Selgard wrote:
-

And if the group votes that dropping fireballs on your friends is a Good alignment appropriate action as long as you also hit enemies and 4 of the 5 agree should the fighter after eating said fireball just turn around and say, "Oh my fine shot chaps it was a jolly fight mind you I do believe my head is aflame and my flesh is melting off of my face, but darn me if you aren't just the stalwartest most kind hearted champions of justice around!"

I don't think something is right just because the majority think so, maybe I'm just an ass, maybe I think democracy is just as flawed as despotism in that way, maybe I just believe in an objective right and wrong but at the end of the day just because 4/5ths of the people think screwing guy 5 is okay well that isn't okay in my book and we're going to get in a fight about it(verbally I don't really do fisticuffs very often).


Gauss wrote:

Humprey Boggard: I laughed also at this. However, I am not asking why the heck is this thread still going on.

The third camp (admitedly a minority) should be called the WBL balance camp. I nominate myself leader of the camp...all hail the leader! J/K. :D

- Gauss

Good to know, Dear Leader. Sorry about mis-camping you.

Personally, I agree with you. I'm happy as long as everyone is satisfied with where their characters are and having fun (this extends to much more general issues than crafting).

I think that crafters should be allowed to charge and the group I'm playing with is all for it. Our GM doesn't enforce a strict "PCs can only sell to NPCs for 50% of value" - with an excellent diplomacy roll you get up to 70% of value.

- Sometimes the rogue will hit it out of the park on diplomacy when he goes to sell items and come back with 60-65% of value (nod nod wink wink). It mostly goes to subsidize his repeated resurrections anyways.

- The witch charges 0-30% crafting (big spenders get their stuff done first with exceptions getting made based on extreme need). Since our cleric just died I'll be talking to her about brewing potions of healing for the frontline types (we stay alive, she gets to memorize fun blasty spells instead of heals, we all win).

- The barbarian makes up for it by simply being the first to grab up magic items claiming need, although the GM is probably going to have more druidic loot found sooner than later (poor Druid has been getting shafted and my Samurai is increasingly annoyed by the non-bueaucratic method of item distribution).

- My samurai is still flush with cash owing to getting standard WBL + even division of gold when he joined the campaign late. As long as he stays in the ballpark the details don't matter much to me.

- The Cleric just died and the player is re-rolling as a ranger, so he'll start out with the appropriate WBL.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

SKR’s clarification states that for calculations of Wealth By Level (WBL), the totals for crafter’s crafted items is based on the crafting price, not the base cost. Everyone else has their WBL calculated using the base cost.

This does not mean that the crafter get’s double loot/gold/drops/etc..

This does have a major impact on WBL calculations.

10th level party of 4
WBL 62,000 gp

No crafter party
4 characters have a WBL of 62,000 gp

Free crafter party
3 characters have a WBL of 124,000 gp
crafter has a WBL of 62,000 gp

GM either has to add a lot more items for the crafter, or may simply drop the loot for everyone and the crafter falls farther and farther behind.

Fee crafter party 10% fee
3 characters pay the crafter 6,200 gp, leaving them 55,800 gp, which turns into WBL of 111, 600
crafter has 62,000+3*6200= a WBL of 80,600

Fee crafter party 20% fee
3 characters pay the crafter 12,400 gp, leaving them 49,600 gp, which turns into WBL of 99,200
crafter has 62,000+3*12,400 = a WBL of 99,200 gp

So, to me, this means that the easiest way to keep WBL in balance, without the GM having to do anything, is for all crafters to charge a 20% fee. The GM does not have to change drops, create special drops, talk to the group to explain why the crafter is suddenly getting a bonus of xxx gold, etc..

Selgard (hey, I spelled it right this time :)), I know that you have stated that you are not a numbers person, but could I get your reaction to the above?

PS: Doing my part to get to 2000 posts
Edit to correct copying error


Sorry to correct your math on this but paying a 10% fee means they pay 5,636.36gp (rounded). If you charge 56,363.64gp and add 10% the result is 62,000gp.

How to arrive at this: 62,000/1.1 = 56,363.64 (rounded). 62,000-56,363.64 = 5,636.36 (rounded) in fees.

This gives the crafter 62,000+3*5,636.36 = 78,909.08.

20% calculations have the same error but Ill let you correct that.

- Gauss


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Gauss wrote:

Sorry to correct your math on this but paying a 10% fee means they pay 5,636.36gp (rounded). If you charge 56,363.64gp and add 10% the result is 62,000gp.

How to arrive at this: 62,000/1.1 = 56,363.64 (rounded). 62,000-56,363.64 = 5,636.36 (rounded) in fees.

This gives the crafter 62,000+3*5,636.36 = 78,909.08.

20% calculations have the same error but Ill let you correct that.

- Gauss

I think my approach was simpler. If they pay 10% of their WBL as a fee, I went with 62,000/10.

Your formula divided the gold by 11. Not sure/understanding where that came from.


What this thread has taught me is to take Hedge magican and then make my extra crafting for half. I'll still make 5% or are some of you going to Meta-game knowing what traits i have and demand I make Items for 45% for the party?


In order to find out how much of X+0.1X = 62000 you need to do a bit of algebra.

X+0.1X = 620000 -> 1.1X = 62000 -> X = 62000/1.1 -> X = 56,363.63.

At that point you can determine the fee by subtracting X from 62,000.

Your method: 55,800gp * 10% = 5,580gp. Total: 55,800+5580 = 61380, a 620gp shortage of 62,000gp.

- Gauss


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Gauss wrote:

In order to find out how much of X+0.1X = 62000 you need to do a bit of algebra.

X+0.1X = 620000 -> 1.1X = 62000 -> X = 62000/1.1 -> X = 56,363.63.

At that point you can determine the fee by subtracting X from 62,000.

Your method: 55,800gp * 10% = 5,580gp. Total: 55,800+5580 = 61380, a 620gp shortage of 62,000gp.

- Gauss

Well, being brain dead and not currently having the inclination to sort it all out for myself, I will take your word for it. :)

The difference is only 1%, so I think the main thrust of what I was trying to get across is still correct.


Talonhawke wrote:
What this thread has taught me is to take Hedge magican and then make my extra crafting for half. I'll still make 5% or are some of you going to Meta-game knowing what traits i have and demand I make Items for 45% for the party?

The answer to your question from Camp Slavery is a resounding yes.

Selgard wrote:
beej67 wrote:
Dr Grecko wrote:
beej67 wrote:
I do this with my party and don't even tell them. I sell them items "at cost" and keep the 5% I earn off Hedge Magician. Everyone wins.
When you say you don't tell them.. Do you keep it from the players OOC as well, or is it just in game that you keep it from the characters?

Both. How do their characters even know what a "Hedge Magician" is? All "hedge magician" means is you've got some spare regs left over after you craft something.

I do actually think I've mentioned it to a couple of other players though. They just shrugged.

Selgard wrote:
beej67 wrote:
I do this with my party and don't even tell them. I sell them items "at cost" and keep the 5% I earn off Hedge Magician. Everyone wins.

Just outta curiousity:

When they do find out you are stealin their gold.. what do you expect their reaction to be?

I'm not "stealing" anything. They paid me a sum for an item and I'm giving them the item they paid for, at the price they agreed to pay for, which is as good a price as they could get from anyone else. That's not "stealing" in any conceivable sense of the word.

Quote:
Much like the rogue swiping a gold sceptre before the party gets to the loot pile

It is in no way whatsoever remotely like stealing a gold sceptre from the top of a loot pile. If they don't want to pay me to craft their boots of speed, they can pay someone else to craft their boots of speed, and they'll be paying the same number. "Traits" are not an in-game concept, they are an out-of-game concept. If someone in your game were to look at you and say "But you didn't tell me you were a hedge magician!" then they're a terrible role player, and I wouldn't game with them. If they continued to get their panties in a wad over it, I'd dump the trait and get a +1 Will Save instead.

If you tell someone you are making an item for cost, and you are really making a profit off the item, you are stealing...


Mistwalker wrote:
Gauss wrote:

In order to find out how much of X+0.1X = 62000 you need to do a bit of algebra.

X+0.1X = 620000 -> 1.1X = 62000 -> X = 62000/1.1 -> X = 56,363.63.

At that point you can determine the fee by subtracting X from 62,000.

Your method: 55,800gp * 10% = 5,580gp. Total: 55,800+5580 = 61380, a 620gp shortage of 62,000gp.

- Gauss

Well, being brain dead and not currently having the inclination to sort it all out for myself, I will take your word for it. :)

The difference is only 1%, so I think the main thrust of what I was trying to get across is still correct.

No worries, I had to actually dredge up the part of my brain that remembered the basis of the math I used. I realize it is a 1% difference. I was just pointing out the slight inaccuracy as politely as I knew how before someone did it less politely. - Gauss


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Humphrey Boggard wrote:

There is a difference in the crafter getting a good drop, and the crafter reaching into my pocket, taking my hard earned gold, and adding it to his wealth.

Him getting a good item when we kill the BBEG is his share of the loot.
Him charging me to craft is him taking my share of the loot, and tacking it onto his.
That, is where my objection lies.

Then he can just not craft for you at all, and none of your loot goes to him.

Problem solved.

Which, please be aware, would be no different than him simply not taking the crafting feat in the first place. In fact, it'd be better for him to not take the crafting feat in the first place, because then he gets an extra feat. If you want your items crafted so badly, burn your own damn feat on crafting.

Btw, my gaming group had a long, hilarious laugh at all the communists in this thread when I brought it up in our session tonight.

Selgard wrote:

Why can't Rodney Ranger or Bobby the Barbarian or Wendy the Wizard or whatever silly named people we come up with charge for their services too?

Answer me that, please.

They can, if they want. These sorts of disagreements / discussions are handled with this fantastic new concept called "role playing," and "character interaction."


Gauss wrote:
beej67 wrote:

How very communist of you.

If I were a player in your game, I would make sure neither I nor anyone else took crafting feats, since you're just going to deprive us of treasure later as punishment for using them. Might as well spend the feat slots on something else, since you'll give us loot to force us onto the WBL table regardless.

Not only that, I'd donate huge stacks of cash to every NPC I met to buy favor. Maybe hire a dozen minstrels to follow me around, and watch the treasure from the monsters rise to compensate my poor money management.

What nonsense...

Why wouldn't you take crafting feats? By RAW crafting counts as cost for the crafter. Thus the crafter would benefit normally. The problem is when the other players are significantly above WBL due to the crafter crafting items for them. By my keeping track of the treasure the players have I can correct any major deviances. Recently I handed out treasure that was not equal in gp but tailored to individual characters so that a discrepancy was corrected. Rather simple to do really and everyone was happy.

Ohh, so you're saying that crafting ups your WBL cap? Fine, then clearly the thing for me to do is take the feats and never bother crafting anything since I'll be able to accumulate more wealth, and you the GM will be forced to hand more out that's tailored to me so I can get up to my artificially high WBL limit, by some weird communist rule that SKR issued.

FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS FEATS, TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS WBL.

What Marxist BS.


gnomersy wrote:
Selgard wrote:
-

And if the group votes that dropping fireballs on your friends is a Good alignment appropriate action as long as you also hit enemies and 4 of the 5 agree should the fighter after eating said fireball just turn around and say, "Oh my fine shot chaps it was a jolly fight mind you I do believe my head is aflame and my flesh is melting off of my face, but darn me if you aren't just the stalwartest most kind hearted champions of justice around!"

I don't think something is right just because the majority think so, maybe I'm just an ass, maybe I think democracy is just as flawed as despotism in that way, maybe I just believe in an objective right and wrong but at the end of the day just because 4/5ths of the people think screwing guy 5 is okay well that isn't okay in my book and we're going to get in a fight about it(verbally I don't really do fisticuffs very often).

I hear what you are saying.

But to me it means this:
If the group says A. And you are absolutely unwilling to budge from B. No give, no nothing.. Then you need to find a new group.
What A and B are, are really irrelevant. It can be X class is broken and you want to play it. it could be that you think 10% is good and they think its stealing. it could be you think its stealing and they think its OK.
Heck it could be that they think PVP is fine and you don't or vice versa.
Or really *any* dispute, disagreement or whatever.
If its something you feel that strongly about and you and them can't come to an agreement- then find a group more aligns with your ideals.

It doesn't necessarily make the group right. (or wrong). I encourage the dialog and hope that someone would want to discuss it. But when it comes down to the final straw, the odd man out has to make a decision.
Is it worth staying with the group, despite whatever it is the group says that they don't like? Or would they be better off leaving and finding a new group?

-S


I just don't understand how Selgard can claim a crafter is greedy for keeping 5% off Hedge Magician when Selgard himself just got a 50% discount on his custom item. Did Selgard not just gain TEN TIMES what the Hedge Magician did? How much more blood does Selgard want to draw from the stone?

TEN TIMES YOUR GAIN IS NOT ENOUGH, IN THE NAME OF THE GROUP I DEMAND YOU GAIN NOTHING AND I GAIN EVERYTHING, EVEN THOUGH YOU DID ALL THE WORK.

lol.

Yall need to put down the Icewind Dale trilogy and read Animal Farm.

Quote:
If you tell someone you are making an item for cost, and you are really making a profit off the item, you are stealing...

I don't tell people I'm making something for them at cost, I tell them I'm making something for them at half market value. Not stealing.

Lol at "slavery camp" and "theivery camp," that's pretty funny. I'm from Georgia, so if you watch the news, clearly we need a "Women as Cattle" camp as well.


beej67 wrote:

I just don't understand how Selgard can claim a crafter is greedy for keeping 5% off Hedge Magician when Selgard himself just got a 50% discount on his custom item. Did Selgard not just gain TEN TIMES what the Hedge Magician did? How much more blood does Selgard want to draw from the stone?

TEN TIMES YOUR GAIN IS NOT ENOUGH, IN THE NAME OF THE GROUP I DEMAND YOU GAIN NOTHING AND I GAIN EVERYTHING, EVEN THOUGH YOU DID ALL THE WORK.

lol.

Yall need to put down the Icewind Dale trilogy and read Animal Farm.

Quote:
If you tell someone you are making an item for cost, and you are really making a profit off the item, you are stealing...

I don't tell people I'm making something for them at cost, I tell them I'm making something for them at half market value. Not stealing.

Lol at "slavery camp" and "theivery camp," that's pretty funny. I'm from Georgia, so if you watch the news, clearly we need a "Women as Cattle" camp as well.

Well, the reason is this:

When you make it for me for half off, I'm not really getting it for half off. Thats just an illusion.
If I give you 4k to make me X. When you do it, I take X, my WBL goes up to 8k. (X*2). This happens for every item that you craft for me. My WBL goes up double.
In return, for each item *you* craft yourself, it doesnt' double.
When you make an item for 4k for yourself- you get charged 4k.
So when you look at our relative WBL you spent 4k for 4k and I spent 4k but am charged 8k. I'm worth twice what you are right? so you think you deserve more of my m oney.
Except the DM is the one who balances WBL not the group. So when he does his WBL audit, you get your 4k (to bring you upo to my 8k) and I am kept at the 8k.

There is no reason for you to take extra money to craft the item to compensate yourself. The DM is going to compensate you for the temporary shift in WBL.

If your DM isn't doing that, then you need to have a nice little sit down with him. (or check the house rules to see how he's treating crafted items. he may be doing like I mentioned in the spoiler a post or three above this)

If your DM still won't do it, then the answer is for the *entire party* to sit down and look at their wbl and adjust it. If they are all worried about WBL (and they nay not be) the group can always self adjust it in that fashion.
(as an aside, you'll also then find out if *they* think you should get double WBL too. By raw you do, no doubt.
But that's no guarantee they'll follow raw. but for this argument, lets assume they do).

-S


Besides, if you think someone crafting for you is stealing from you, then you can always just NOT ASK THEM TO CRAFT FOR YOU and they'll probably be more than happy to take you off their queue. Go buy your crap at the store.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
beej67 wrote:

I just don't understand how Selgard can claim a crafter is greedy for keeping 5% off Hedge Magician when Selgard himself just got a 50% discount on his custom item. Did Selgard not just gain TEN TIMES what the Hedge Magician did? How much more blood does Selgard want to draw from the stone?

TEN TIMES YOUR GAIN IS NOT ENOUGH, IN THE NAME OF THE GROUP I DEMAND YOU GAIN NOTHING AND I GAIN EVERYTHING, EVEN THOUGH YOU DID ALL THE WORK.

lol.

Yall need to put down the Icewind Dale trilogy and read Animal Farm.

Quote:
If you tell someone you are making an item for cost, and you are really making a profit off the item, you are stealing...

I don't tell people I'm making something for them at cost, I tell them I'm making something for them at half market value. Not stealing.

Lol at "slavery camp" and "theivery camp," that's pretty funny. I'm from Georgia, so if you watch the news, clearly we need a "Women as Cattle" camp as well.

It is all about the WBL religion and WINNING THE GAME.

1) The second you consider a guideline a hard rule that you shouldn't budged in any way it become a religion whose tenets can't be discussed but only followed. Some guy has pointed it out in this thread, I have pointed it out in other threads: if you follow WBL as a hard rule that should be enforced the guys that buy and use tons of expendable can easily exploit the system, as he is constantly burning resources that the GM will replenish increasing the loot. The guy that use permanent items is instead don't get anything as he has more stuff stuff.
The cicada is rewarded, the ant is punished.
Never seen a valid reply to that.

2) "He has more stuff than me, he is winning the game. Unfair, unjust, unacceptable." it is the same logic of "all characters should be perfectly balanced". I care more for fun than perfect balance.
Apparently some people will not find the game fun unless there is a perfect balance.

- * -

Note/edit:

Yes, I am speaking of extreme positions, even Selgard (slavery camp leader) don't get so far.


beej67, I have been nothing but polite, I would request that you maintain civility. While we do not have to agree insulting me is against board policy.

I do not steal from any players. All of my players are completely aware and agree with my methods to maintain WBL. It is an integral part of the game. If a player has too little or too much treasure that throws off the CR balance. In theory one character's feat can result in a 100% increase in effective treasure for everyone else. The reality is that it is probably closer to a 50% increase (since there are expenditures the feat is not covering) but that still ramps up the power considerably. According to the game at that point you need to increase the CR of the encounters.

Diego Rossi: One way to deal with the consumable loophole is that the treasure per encounter gives the players more than WBL does. If you total up the number of encounters at a given level required to advance and multiply that total by the GP gained per encounter you find the GP per level is greater than WBL. It is stated that some of that is assumed to be used in the replacement of equipment and consumables.

Even with that though the system isnt perfect and requires monitoring. Some players could try to game the system but the DM should be able to find ways to deal with it.

One last note to all: I am not constantly concerned with this balance. I simply check it every few levels and modify future rewards accordingly. It is something DMs have been doing for decades. 'The fighter has been getting most of the treasure, Ill tailor something to the wizard.'

- Gauss

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gauss wrote:


Diego Rossi: One way to deal with the consumable loophole is that the treasure per encounter gives the players more than WBL does. If you total up the number of encounters at a given level required to advance and multiply that total by the GP gained per encounter you find the GP per level is greater than WBL. It is stated that some of that is assumed to be used in the replacement of equipment and consumables.

Even with that though the system isnt perfect and requires monitoring. Some players could try to game the system but the DM should be able to find ways to deal with it.

And what will that accomplish? The guy that keep a +1 sword but buy and use tons of +5 oil of magic weapon is still under WBL when you do your audit, the guys that has brought a +3 sword is still at or above WBL.

If you give out rewards in a way that try to balance the WBL every few levels the cicada guy will have benefited for a "free" +5 weapon for most of the time and will get a better item.

- * -

A question for the "the good of the group first" guys. How you manage things like the scrolls and wand charges that the spellcasters or UMD guys use up on the group behalf? And the other expendables (potions, missile ammunitions and so on)?

If the effect of the crafting feats should be equally shared, I don't see why the cost shouldn't be equally shared. A thing like a wand of CLW, Fireball or Black tentacles is used for the group good, so why it count in the user WBL and in his share of the loot?
Wouldn't be logic to pool all the expendables and distribute then to the people that can use them free of charge?

Shadow Lodge

im still of the opinion that metagaming is a bad thing. that your character wouldnt care about a 10% charge, only that its fgetting a 40% discount on what ever item hes getting.

to me its this simple. i dont allow metagaming at my tables as a gm, or as a a player. and i would ignore said metagamer if he objected to my charging him, if he chose to be stubborn and pay full price, good for him.


Diego Rossi wrote:


And what will that accomplish? The guy that keep a +1 sword but buy and use tons of +5 oil of magic weapon is still under WBL when you do your audit, the guys that has brought a +3 sword is still at or above WBL.

If you give out rewards in a way that try to balance the WBL every few levels the cicada guy will have benefited for a "free" +5 weapon for most of the time and will get a better item.

- * -

A question for the "the good of the group first" guys. How you manage things like the scrolls and wand charges that the spellcasters or UMD guys use up on the group behalf? And the other expendables (potions, missile ammunitions and so on)?

If the effect of the crafting feats should be equally shared, I don't see why the cost shouldn't be equally shared. A thing like a wand of CLW, Fireball or Black tentacles is used for the group good, so why it count in the user WBL and in his share of the loot?
Wouldn't be logic to pool all the expendables and distribute then to the people that can use them free of charge?

For starters it's not like the DM is a computer program that responds based on a set of conditions I don't think anyone has said that WBL is an absolute RULE and if you aren't following it exactly then you should be stuck in an oven and broiled alive.

But WBL is a guideline and it exists for a reason, because you need a method to judge how strong the party is before you throw the three headed dragon god of doom at them and they all die.

Now if the DM sees them abusing expendables in an attempt to cheat the system he just docks 10 or 20% off of WBL or for that matter just remarks that the supply of potions in the area has dried up they'll gladly bring you more but sadly the shipping charges will increase cost by 10% and you can only get so many so fast.

All things equal the GM is always more capable than the players of abusing the system because he decides on the rules this is why people shouldn't try to beat the GM because he's the closest thing to God in the game.

Anyways the way I see it the rules+Faq make it clear how we treat the crafter he's supposed to have an inequal share. How you achieve it is entirely up to you and your group.

And OOC I can see being told we don't like the idea of being charged 10%, how about the DM only drop X gold and you pull the remainder out of the ether or whatever you want to call it? I could probably live with that idea, I wouldn't like you compromising my vision for my character but I'd figure out a way to make the crafting a business arrangement for free and work around it.

But, if you decide we don't like the idea of the feat making you more powerful ... well that's a big old sack of steaming dog turds imo. That's when I'd ask the fighter to never use power attack anymore(he can choose not to take the feat of course but if he takes it he can't use it) because I'm not comfortable with his feat making him stronger either.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Selgard wrote:

I'm in the no camp, and my group does loot largely as you describe in your post.

The DM gives us whatever loot we get, we distribute it however we see fit, the crafter has been nice enough to turn some (but definately nowhere close to all) of our loot into crafted items, and we move on merrily. He sees no reason to charge us for what he does, no one is charging him for what they do, and we're a big (7 member) party trudging along through the Adventure Path

Something that has been bothering me for a while, is that your side of the argument seems to say that all adventuring groups are a close knit group of friends. Not all groups are that.

When I was in the military, I had a guy in my unit that I loathed, with him returning the feeling with interest.

In the field, we looked out for each other, because we were in the same unit.

Off duty, we had several goes at each other (when I was young, stupid and had anger management issues), ending with blackeyes, damaged noses and often severe bruising in a lot of other areas.

Yes, there were a few times that I had his back when we were off-duty, when he was being swarmed (he was a bastard, but he was "my" bastard), but with those exceptions, we did not hang out with each other - quite the opposite, nor did we do favors for each other.

All of that to say that even when the PCs are in the world saving business, they are not necessarily best buds.

In one campaign (where I finally get to game), my cleric crafter does not have a good relationship with the dwarf spellslinger/gunslinger. While the rest of the group get's their items with a 10% fee, the dwarf get's their with a 30% fee - and if they mouth off about the fee, then it will be at 50 or 60%.


Do what's role play appropriate.

That may be your wizard charging for his time - he likely values his spare time!
Or it may be your wizard doing favours for the people who he has a close relationship with!


Extended quote of quotes:

beej67 wrote:
Humphrey Boggard wrote:

There is a difference in the crafter getting a good drop, and the crafter reaching into my pocket, taking my hard earned gold, and adding it to his wealth.

Him getting a good item when we kill the BBEG is his share of the loot.
Him charging me to craft is him taking my share of the loot, and tacking it onto his.
That, is where my objection lies.

Then he can just not craft for you at all, and none of your loot goes to him.

Problem solved.

Which, please be aware, would be no different than him simply not taking the crafting feat in the first place. In fact, it'd be better for him to not take the crafting feat in the first place, because then he gets an extra feat. If you want your items crafted so badly, burn your own damn feat on crafting.

Btw, my gaming group had a long, hilarious laugh at all the communists in this thread when I brought it up in our session tonight.

Selgard wrote:

Why can't Rodney Ranger or Bobby the Barbarian or Wendy the Wizard or whatever silly named people we come up with charge for their services too?

Answer me that, please.

They can, if they want. These sorts of disagreements / discussions are handled with this fantastic new concept called "role playing," and "character interaction."

Hey beej67 - I didn't write that, sounds like Selgard, dragonfire or AdamantiumDragon to me. Maybe this was taken from my earlier response to TalonHawke in which I quoted Selgard quoting you quoting Dr Grecko quoting you?

I've always been on the pro-thievery camp (as opposed to the pro-slavery camp) and I'm on the record as going a step further - I don't mind the rogue actually stealing from the party as long as it's in character and everyone's WBL balances out in the end (the rogue has had to pay for two resurrections in the last eight sessions or so, I've taken to calling him a "crit magnet").

Edit: Come to think of it the rogue dies every time my g/f shows up at the game (sometimes she studies while we game).


Keep the 10% for normal items, but forego the cost for items that build a group identity (cloaks/shields that have the kingdom's heraldric symbol prominently displayed, matched set items across the eentire party, that sort of thing).

It give the party members an out, and promotes unity, a goal that Abadar would approve of.


beej67 wrote:

Wow.

The crafter isn't stealing from you, the WBL Nazi GM is. You do realize this, right?

My opinion of SKR as a game designer goes down another notch every day I spend on these forums.

The problem with SKR's ruling: Every time an item is crafted for someone besides the crafter herself it creates it's base cost in surplus wealth.

The only argument is how this surplus wealth is split.

WBL101 for non-accounting majors:

SKR suggests that the crafter's wealth be calculated by the crafting cost of the item but the non-crafters' wealth be calculated normally (i.e., full price for crafted items). So when a non-crafting PC pays a crafting PC to craft an item the difference in the full price and the base crafting price is not factored into the WBL accounting rubric.

If the PC pays any crafting fee whatsoever then the crafter is ahead of even his expanded WBL limit set by the SKR ruling. If the PC pays any less than the full price of the item the PC is ahead of his WBL set by the SKR ruling.

Let's crunch the numbers, shall we?

Suppose a 7th level Samurai has 23,500gp in total wealth (exactly the WBL guideline) and has 2600gp in his pocket. His friend the 7th level witch has taken craft wondrous item and can craft him a belt of mighty strength +2. The base crafting cost is 2000gp and the value for calculating the samurai's wealth is twice that.

Scenario #1: Samurai and witch are married or in some sort of weird polygamous group where everyone acts like they're married. Witch crafts the belt of mighty strength +2 at cost for the samurai. The samurai now has 25,500gp of wealth (2000gp surplus) and the witch is still at her expected wealth.

Scenario #2: Samurai and witch are friendly but not locked-for-life-communist-pinkos. Witch offers to craft for a 15% fee (2300gp). The result is that the samurai now has 25,200gp of wealth (1700 more than his expected WBL) and the witch now has 23,800 (300 more than her expected WBL).

Scenario #3: Samurai and witch agree to split the 2000gp surplus wealth. Witch charges 3000gp and both are ahed of WBL by 1000gp.

Scenario #4: Now there are three samurai and one witch. Every samurai wants a belt of strength +2 and there is now accordingly 6000gp of surplus wealth. Now 6000/4 = 1500 is the surplus wealth per party member. The witch should charge each samurai 1500/3 = 500gp for crafting. So each samurai pays 2500gp for his belt of mighty strength and everyone ends up exactly equal in character wealth.

For those of you keeping track: The Humphrey Boggard formula for crafting equality is as follows,

crafting fee = base cost of item divided by number of members in group.

In other words every time an item is crafted for someone besides the crafter herself it creates it's base cost in surplus wealth. The above formula splits it equally between crafters and non-crafters. Incidentally this is the exact same formula that QuantumSteve put in a response to Ravingdork at post 645, but now with a snappier name and a more developed explanation.

Selgard, dragonfire, Adamantium (pro-slavery) would have that only the non-crafters split the surplus wealth. Non-crafters are now the base cost of all crafted items above their WBL and crafters are exactly at their WBL.

gnomersy, Diego Rossi, Mistwalker and many others (pro-thievery) would have that the crafter charge some percentage (always enumerated as less than what an even division would suggest except in the largest parties) that would have non-crafters and crafters alike ahead of WBL, but skewed towards non crafters.

Boggard, QuantumSteve and Ravingdork (team awesome) developed a formula to split the excess wealth among all PCs evenly.

Ironically, the OP (team super-awesome) was the only one with an idea that doesn't completely mangle the WBL guidelines. Crafter charges a fee and then donates it to his temple of Adabar. The OP suggested 15% but in light of a simple WBL calculation the correct fee is 100% base cost.


Selgard wrote:

I agree. The issue arises when the crafter says that because he's giving someone a 50% discount then he deserves 10% extra. Which is what most of the past 1200 posts have been about, really.

the "yes, 10%" camp and the "no 10%" camp.
I'm in the no camp, and my group does loot largely as you describe in your post.

To which I reply...

beej67 wrote:
Besides, if you think someone crafting for you is stealing from you, then you can always just NOT ASK THEM TO CRAFT FOR YOU and they'll probably be more than happy to take you off their queue. Go buy your crap at the store.


Diego Rossi wrote:
It is all about the WBL religion and WINNING THE GAME.

I think ^this^ is the meat of it, as is the meat of any class envy position wherever it comes from, be it Marxism or what have you. And the truth, as always, is that communism kills the golden goose.

If you want me to make zero profit from my crafting, then I'll just by different feats, and nobody gets the benefit.

Quote:

1) The second you consider a guideline a hard rule that you shouldn't budged in any way it become a religion whose tenets can't be discussed but only followed. Some guy has pointed it out in this thread, I have pointed it out in other threads: if you follow WBL as a hard rule that should be enforced the guys that buy and use tons of expendable can easily exploit the system, as he is constantly burning resources that the GM will replenish increasing the loot. The guy that use permanent items is instead don't get anything as he has more stuff stuff.

The cicada is rewarded, the ant is punished.
Never seen a valid reply to that.

2) "He has more stuff than me, he is winning the game. Unfair, unjust, unacceptable." it is the same logic of "all characters should be perfectly balanced". I care more for fun than perfect balance.
Apparently some people will not find the game fun unless there is a perfect balance.

This. Crafters take crafting feats specifically so they can have more loot. If you want to have more loot, take your own crafting feats. If you want to piggyback off of others crafting feats, don't whine and complain when he sells you something 40% under cost, and keeps 10% for himself! He just did you a FAVOR that earned you FOUR TIMES what he earned, and all his downtime was sucked up by that favor while you got to run around and do other things.


Gauss wrote:
beej67, I have been nothing but polite, I would request that you maintain civility. While we do not have to agree insulting me is against board policy.

For many people the terms "Communist" and "Marxist" and "Occupy Greyhawk" are not insults. I presumed since you abide by an extension of these philosophies in your game, that those terms would not be insulting to you. If you are insulted by them, perhaps you have a different term you'd like me to use? I'll happily use it.

Quote:
I do not steal from any players. All of my players are completely aware and agree with my methods to maintain WBL. It is an integral part of the game. If a player has too little or too much treasure that throws off the CR balance. In theory one character's feat can result in a 100% increase in effective treasure for everyone else. The reality is that it is probably closer to a 50% increase (since there are expenditures the feat is not covering) but that still ramps up the power considerably. According to the game at that point you need to increase the CR of the encounters.

1) Probably closer to 30%, because the party isn't hocking everything they find, and you lose value when you hock it.

2) The effects that 30% has on CR are peanuts compared to the effects of the Leadership Feat, and you don't even have to spend all your downtime to get Leadership's benefits.

3) It's also peanuts compared to what a properly built arcane summoner can do with Planar Binding, what a Druid can do with Liveoak/Awaken, what a necromancer can do with undead, etc. All these things impact the encounter CR more than loot does.

Do you prohibit those things as well in your games? Do you assign value to mounts, cohorts, animal companions, familiars, demon summons, bound undead, etc in your games, and reduce those PC's loot accordingly? Lord I hope not.

It's your job as GM to manage encounter CR. If your players are okay with you managing that by a highly complicated Biannual Game Audit instead of adjusting your monsters then good for you and good for them. The object of the game is to have fun, and if you guys have fun doing that then I'm happy for you. I wouldn't ever want to play in a game like that, for continuity reasons if nothing else, and I know very few of the people I play with would either.


TheSideKick wrote:

im still of the opinion that metagaming is a bad thing. that your character wouldnt care about a 10% charge, only that its fgetting a 40% discount on what ever item hes getting.

to me its this simple. i dont allow metagaming at my tables as a gm, or as a a player. and i would ignore said metagamer if he objected to my charging him, if he chose to be stubborn and pay full price, good for him.

This. The whole complaint is something to handle in-game.

If I were a crafter and you asked me to craft something for you, I would tell you a price and if you didn't like that price you can buy it from the store. And if you gave me a bunch of lip about how a 40% discount isn't a big enough discount, I'd tell you to take a walk. No character I have ever played has that little spine to cave on that. Some characters I've played are *generous* enough to give the full 50% discount, and if I wanted to make some cheese on the side with those *generous* characters I took Hedge Magician. There is no way another character even "knows" what "Hedge Magician" even is. It is an out of game mechanic.

1,201 to 1,250 of 2,075 << first < prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Advice / Creating magical item for the party + small fee on the work = players uprorar? All Messageboards

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.