And generally you're going to want to have the +6 to your main stat about level 12 or so. Esp if you have a crafter in the party.
==Aelryinth
Arg, I hope this thread doesn't fishtail into yet another debate about how insanely stupid the magic item crafting rules are...
Also realize that Wizards basically picked up +2 hp/HD in Paizo vs 3.5. The d6 hd and the Favored class bonus both mean they have more health then 3.5 wizards.
The class didn't get nerfed, some of the spells got balanced out. If you use 3.5 spells, weeeeee, the wizard is much stronger then ever.
==Aelryinth
And generally you're going to want to have the +6 to your main stat about level 12 or so. Esp if you have a crafter in the party.
==Aelryinth
How insanely stupid are they? They seem to work just fine to me.
i think you quoted the wrong guy, dork. Heh. ANd we both know that you can abuse the heck out of crafting if you even bother a little to try.
==Aelryinth
Arg, I hope this thread doesn't fishtail into yet another debate about how insanely stupid the magic item crafting rules are...
How insanely stupid are they? They seem to work just fine to me.
And we both know that you can abuse the heck out of crafting if you even bother a little to try.
==Aelryinth
Short of making completely new homebrew items without appropriate GM input, name three.
I'll admit I have a hard time corelating "I have more skill points then I want to use...' to 'Wizards got screwed'.
RD,
Because of the rules that crafted items basically double your WBL if you craft. That can rapidly lead to party imbalance...esp if the 2x wbl applies to you and NOT to the rest of the party.
And then there's the strangeness of being able to craft for the rest of the party at anywhere from half price to full price, and yet the items still count full price towards WBL, so the DM has to hand out less loot to keep things balanced, which means why did you take crafting, etc.
There's a reason there's no crafting in PFS, and it's not because of unique/custom items.
==Aelryinth
The equivalent to a +1 across the board is hardly unbalancing, which is what doubling your starting funds generally gets you. You already get that much range, and more, just from varying character builds!
Aelryinth, with RD's extensive knowledge of the game, if he does not agree that the magic crafting system in PF is a mess, he's just not going to agree. Since RD is one of the more avid "optimizers" on these boards, I am not at all surprised that he doesn't agree. Half of the stuff he likes to do depends on exploitable magic item rules, so it is no wonder he doesn't think they are a mess.
Aelryinth, with RD's extensive knowledge of the game, if he does not agree that the magic crafting system in PF is a mess, he's just not going to agree. Since RD is one of the more avid "optimizers" on these boards, I am not at all surprised that he doesn't agree. Half of the stuff he likes to do depends on exploitable magic item rules, so it is no wonder he doesn't think they are a mess.
How on earth is it an exploit if it is EXACTLY what the game developers intended? There's no loose interpretations being used here.
I have to admit: I usually do not like to agree with RD, but in this case he is correct. I ran the numbers and posted them once. I am not going to dig them up again.
Craft Wondrous Item amounts to a +1 an ability score modifier and a +1 to your resistance bonus.
Craft Magic Arms and Armor amounts to a +1 attack/damage, +1armor bonus, and +1 shield bonus.
The other feats give you even less.
This is not gamebreaking IMO. A bit better than most other feats? yes. Rediculously better? No.
With that said, I do believe the crafting system could use a major revision to clean up inconsistencies, craft DCs etc. But we are not going to see that in this version.
The WBL FAQ is to prevent non-crafters from benefiting from the crafter's feats. Prior to that FAQ a crafter's fellow PCs could tell the crafter to craft for them. Thus benefiting the party with a bonus feat that they did not earn, do not have, and should not have.
Crafting is INTENDED to increase the power of the crafter's magic items relative to the rest of the party. After all, he spent a feat on it didn't he? They did not.
- Gauss
My problems with the Paizo magic item system is not about how crafters gain an advantage from crafting.
It's crazy stuff like being able to create items with spell effects the caster can't cast at caster levels several levels higher with a puny +5 modifier on the crafting skill check.
It's stuff like "making a level X spell into a magic item costs Y gold, unless it happens to be one of the following list of spells in which case the result would be game breaking so it doesn't work that way."
It's stuff like "Custom magic items are totally up to the GM and we publish meaningless guidelines that we will immediately tell you are worthless as soon as you ask how to make anything specific."
It's stuff like "If you have a magic item crafter, the only way to make any actual gold from crafting is to overcharge your own party members for your services, because NPCs won't pay you as much as you can force your party members to pay."
Or stuff like "You can put an enchantment on a weapon that will last forever but the same cost will only get you 50 rounds of ammunition with the same enchantment".
Or stuff like "lesser spellcasters who gain certain spells at lower CASTER levels but the same or higher CHARACTER levels as full casters can nevertheless make magic items with the same spells at a much lower cost than full casters."
Stuff like that. Just insane stuff that makes no sense whatsoever, some of which can be, and usually is, exploited by clever players.
So, to use your argument, a Fighter could fall into a situation without her resource - hit points. So if the casters could not face every situation with their abilities, the same should be true for Fighters, Rogues, Rangers and so on.
But that's not really a 'unique' resource...
EVERY class has to worry about hit points. By that logic casters now have to worry about TWO limited resources, Spells AND Hit points....
It's crazy stuff like being able to create items with spell effects the caster can't cast at caster levels several levels higher with a puny +5 modifier on the crafting skill check.
Got any examples of this?
It's stuff like "making a level X spell into a magic item costs Y gold, unless it happens to be one of the following list of spells in which case the result would be game breaking so it doesn't work that way."
Interesting how you don't seem to have any specific examples of this.
It's stuff like "Custom magic items are totally up to the GM and we publish meaningless guidelines that we will immediately tell you are worthless as soon as you ask how to make anything specific."
Saying "these are guidelines" and "you should check with your GM" and "you should compare new items to existing ones is not nearly on the same level as "they are worthless." With something as complicated and vast as the imagination, you need to have a somewhat loose system. The only alternative is a 4E styled magic item system.
It's stuff like "If you have a magic item crafter, the only way to make any actual gold from crafting is to overcharge your own party members for your services, because NPCs won't pay you as much as you can force your party members to pay."
Force? That's some pretty strong verbiage you're throwing out there. I've personally never been able to force any of my fellow adventurers to do anything they didn't want to.
Or stuff like "You can put an enchantment on a weapon that will last forever but the same cost will only get you 50 rounds of ammunition with the same enchantment".
Fifty did strike me as a somewhat arbitrary number, aside from that, I see nothing wrong with this. Getting a permanent magic bow with some specialized temporary magical ammunition can make for some seriously powerful and fun combos.
Or stuff like "lesser spellcasters who gain certain spells at lower CASTER levels but the same or higher CHARACTER levels as full casters can nevertheless make magic items with the same spells at a much lower cost than full casters."
I'm not sure what you mean with this one.
Stuff like that. Just insane stuff that makes no sense whatsoever, some of which can be, and usually is, exploited by clever players.
There are a few areas in the magic item system that lack consistency, but much of what you seem to be trying to describe seem like complete non-issues to me.
Or stuff like "lesser spellcasters who gain certain spells at lower CASTER levels but the same or higher CHARACTER levels as full casters can nevertheless make magic items with the same spells at a much lower cost than full casters."I'm not sure what you mean with this one.
Things like Summoners having haste as a second-level spell, and thus being able to craft it at the reduced cost.
Things like Summoners having haste as a second-level spell, and thus being able to craft it at the reduced cost.Or stuff like "lesser spellcasters who gain certain spells at lower CASTER levels but the same or higher CHARACTER levels as full casters can nevertheless make magic items with the same spells at a much lower cost than full casters."I'm not sure what you mean with this one.
Ah, yes, well in that case, that's not a problem with the magic item creation system. It's a problem with the new classes.
I just can't believe the "charge party members" thing got brought up again. Every time that happens you get the Marxist pinkos vs greedy pigs crap. The feat works as designed if the crafter benefits. If other party members want stuff that stuff comes out of their WBL guidelines. If the crafter profits, that money comes out of his WBL guidelines. What the crafter charges is completely arbitrary if the GM just pays attention to what the guidelines are telling him. As stated crafting doesn't really add much in the way of number bonus, and mostly seems to just give better access to what items people really want.
That being said last time I played a crafter things were pretty quickly unbalanced for WBL purposes. Played the Skull and Shackles campaign, and that module seemed to drop a bunch of wealth on the party (some of which is supposed to go towards ship upkeep, but some of the magic items blow out individual party members loot caps.) I was over 100k gear value by level 5, other party members were almost as high, and all I had crafted by that point was cloaks +2 for everybody. Most of the gear was in strange but good items like the buccaneer's breastplate and crazy fluff item's that were probably better to sell, but were too cool and didn't want to pay the 50 percent sell penalty.
Yeah, RD, as I said, you like all these things because you exploit them. No surprise at all.
My issues are that they make no friggin' sense and create constant arguments about what, why and how things should work.
Already two of my examples are getting responses of "Oh noes! Don't start THAT argument again!"
Which more or less proves my point already.
Most of the arguments over crafters charging have to do with out of game expectations of socialism vs capitalism. Not because of the rules, which are rather clear about how things should be handled for WBL balancing.
Crafting feats give a very small benefit numerically for the user. As stated usually a +1 here and there. Hardly game shattering. Due to the cost progression on higher items this is pretty much expected. Just look at the cost progression of a +1 sword to a +3 sword.
Crafting feats give a what can be a very large disadvantage for the player who takes them if they needed to take a combat related feat. The +1 item bonus goes a long way towards offsetting this, but even then it can be sketchy compared to other feat options Consumables are the most prone for abuse, since scrolls, wands, and potions give you expanded options, but the wealth destruction and action economy already balance that out.
Crafting for others is self limiting if the GM actually follows the guidelines for WBL, and it doesn't even matter if the crafter charges, as only his own personal use items count towards the "crafted items only count for build cost for WBL calculations". That means any profit he gains is deducted from his WBL going foward. (and yes there is ways for GMs to direct loot towards individuals rather than the generic "party fund" that gets divided out when going to town).
Yeah, RD, as I said, you like all these things because you exploit them. No surprise at all.
Again, what exploits are you referring to?
My issues are that they make no friggin' sense and create constant arguments about what, why and how things should work.
This is the internet. People will create constant arguments about what, why and how things should work no matter what.
Already two of my examples are getting responses of "Oh noes! Don't start THAT argument again!"
I must have missed it.
Which more or less proves my point already.
Which was that the system as it stands is nonsensical and exploitable?
notabot, the ONLY one of the items I listed that gets the socialism vs capitalism juices flowing is the one where crafters overcharge party members compared to what they can sell to NPCs.
My issue with that has nothing to do with socialism or capitalism. It simply has to do with verisimilitude. I make something but I cannot find an NPC who will pay as much as I can force my party members to pay, simply due to an arbitrary rule. My party members cannot buy from NPCs cheaper than I can charge them so they are more or less at my mercy for anything I want to charge from 1/2 to full price for the item, and I get to tell them I am "doing them a favor" while I take their money.
It's not capitalism vs socialism, it's just plain inane and arbitrary. It literally makes no sense.
AD, the custom item system has always been wonky. It was wonky in 3.X and it is still just as wonky.
I dont see a problem with not being able to cast a spell and still being able to make an item. Why should a smith be able to make a magic item without knowing the spell and a spellcaster cannot? Note: The smith making magic items is a trope that I like.
Regarding overcharging the fellow players: you should not gain money from them. They pay you to craft? Fine, it still costs full price. Where does the extra go? Not in your pocket. It is a balance issue. Does it violate RP consistency? Perhaps. But, you can come up with rationales why it doesn't. My solution? All equipment is bought and sold at full price (or the crafted price). Permanent Magic items made for someone else costs full price. Easy, simple on GM and players.
Much of this is due to the system they inherited. Hopefully in PF 2.0 it will be cleaned up.
- Gauss
Gauss, I am aware that the bizarre, nonsensical crafting pricing rules are a poor and misguided attempt to enforce game balance.
That's why they make no sense whatsoever in the game world.
I do not accept that there is no way to allow crafting without requiring verisimilitude breaking arbitrary rules to attempt (with limited success) to enforce "game balance". I think the game designers just took the easy way out and we've been stuck with it ever since.
Yes, I understand that it is inherited. That doesn't make any difference in how the rules impact game play today.
And yes, I find it absurd to think that a crafter can create magic items that can do things the crafter themselves cannot do, simply by accepting a ludicrously pathetic +5 to the DC of the crafting of it. At the very least, even if it is allowed (which I would argue it should not be) the DC penalty should scale as the difference between the crafter level and the spell level increases, and it should scale non-linearly such that it becomes much, much harder to do the higher level you attempt.
My issue with that has nothing to do with socialism or capitalism. It simply has to do with verisimilitude. I make something but I cannot find an NPC who will pay as much as I can force my party members to pay, simply due to an arbitrary rule. My party members cannot buy from NPCs cheaper than I can charge them so they are more or less at my mercy for anything I want to charge from 1/2 to full price for the item, and I get to tell them I am "doing them a favor" while I take their money.
It's not capitalism vs socialism, it's just plain inane and arbitrary. It literally makes no sense.
I've seen plenty of people argue that it makes PLENTY of sense, that what makes no sense is the party expecting the item crafter to be their personal crafting slave back at home while they party with wenches at the local tavern all night.
Different strokes for different folks I guess.
Gauss, I am aware that the bizarre, nonsensical crafting pricing rules are a poor and misguided attempt to enforce game balance.
That's why they make no sense whatsoever in the game world.
Hardly misguided.
I do not accept that there is no way to allow crafting without requiring verisimilitude breaking arbitrary rules to attempt (with limited success) to enforce "game balance". I think the game designers just took the easy way out and we've been stuck with it ever since.
It only breaks the verisimilitude for those unwilling to come up with sensible rationalizations.
Yes, I understand that it is inherited. That doesn't make any difference in how the rules impact game play today.
Well, it does make a difference, but I agree that it shouldn't.
And yes, I find it absurd to think that a crafter can create magic items that can do things the crafter themselves cannot do, simply by accepting a ludicrously pathetic +5 to the DC of the crafting of it. At the very least, even if it is allowed (which I would argue it should not be) the DC penalty should scale as the difference between the crafter level and the spell level increases, and it should scale non-linearly such that it becomes much, much harder to do the higher level you attempt.
The DC already gets really high really fast. To make it non-linear would make it impossible. Might as well say "you're not allowed." But that's pretty much what you want, isn't it?
As for crafting items that can do things you can't: is that not the whole purpose behind the concept of invention? To meet a need that has not yet been met?
I always saw the 50 percent sell to vendor more of a realism type thing myself. The PCs are adventurers, not merchants. When a merchant buys something at half, and sells at full, he is covering his overhead and making a small profit. After all, who knows how long he might have to sit on an item, or the costs for moving it to a large enough market to sell it. A PC when he sells needs the money now, so has to accept what is offered. 100% markup is pretty standard IRL for many items, in fact many consumer goods have 200% markup or more (those 75% sales at department stores still generate profit to give you an idea). Some big ticket items and high volume items have lower markups, but honestly the 100% default markup is a good enough number for the game. While it might be realistic to allow bartering for a better number, its also realistic to have the merchant try for a better bargain. Rather than bogging the game down with Recettear style mini games(a video game about a fantasy item shop), its just a good compromise to put the number at 50%.
Now a PC selling to another at 75% item value might seem like a bargain for the buyer, the criticism is that the seller is gaining a increase in wealth that he couldn't get selling to a random merchant. Well the problem isn't really applicable, as he isn't selling to a merchant, he is selling to an end user. End users are supposed to pay full price, as that is the assumption for WBL guidelines (one way or another, if they get a discount it comes out of future troves). The increase of gold that the crafter gains is deducted from his WBL allowance, using the full profit value (rather than the deduction that personal use items have).
In general crafting feats screw up division of party loot, as a crafting character should deduct his profits from what he gets from a distribution. Any party member that got a discount from a crafter, should deduct his profit (in terms of WBL) from his share of party loot. Failure to do so forces the GM to tailor rewards for party members who fall behind as a result. Generating extra work is something I like to avoid, so IMHO its just better if the crafter charges full price, as that limits the number of calculations that need to be done to divide up the loot. It is possible to avoid having to do any deductions if the crafter charges only cost for all party members, and each party member gets EXACTLY the same amount of gold value discount, but how often does that happen?
notabot, saving myself from having to do extra work in an effort to maintain WBL is why I made the changes that I did.
Normally: I keep track of player's equipment in order to make sure they are somewhere near WBL. If I give stuff out I have to figure out if they will sell it or not. If I am wrong I have to adjust future treasures to compensate.
My system of buy/sell at full (or crafted) prices: I can give out treasure and never worry about if they are near WBL. I just give it out and it never leaves them. To cover the cost of consumables I give out about 15% extra (rather than the 30-40% table 12-5 uses). This makes my life VERY simple. After all, gp value is not really money, it is a metric (one of them) for measuring player power levels.
- Gauss
Yeah, your solution is a perfectly fine way of doing it. TBH right now I've been running modules/APs, so I've been letting the players gain only what they earn normally in the module, and due to time constraints the crafting issue hasn't been a problem. Also the only person with crafting ability sees eye to eye with me on the issue and has only been crafting consumables so far. Consumables are treated like a party resource among my players (nearly all players can naturally use them, UMD it, or benefit from the item being used), so any crafted consumable has been coming off the top of the party share (party grosses X, character makes consumable Y, party share is X-Y/party size).
In any group I play in I advocate that we split the treasure X+1 where X = number of players and +1 is party share. Healing and toolbox type consumables come out of the party share. Group equipment like a bag of holding also come out of party share.
P.S. It is weird holding a conversation with you because of our avatar pics. :P
- Gauss
I have to admit: I usually do not like to agree with RD, but in this case he is correct. I ran the numbers and posted them once. I am not going to dig them up again.
Craft Wondrous Item amounts to a +1 an ability score modifier and a +1 to your resistance bonus.
Craft Magic Arms and Armor amounts to a +1 attack/damage, +1armor bonus, and +1 shield bonus.
The other feats give you even less.
This is not gamebreaking IMO. A bit better than most other feats? yes. Rediculously better? No.
With that said, I do believe the crafting system could use a major revision to clean up inconsistencies, craft DCs etc. But we are not going to see that in this version.
The WBL FAQ is to prevent non-crafters from benefiting from the crafter's feats. Prior to that FAQ a crafter's fellow PCs could tell the crafter to craft for them. Thus benefiting the party with a bonus feat that they did not earn, do not have, and should not have.
Crafting is INTENDED to increase the power of the crafter's magic items relative to the rest of the party. After all, he spent a feat on it didn't he? They did not.
- Gauss
I'm afraid now that I am totally missing where you derive your numbers from.
It means you can afford 25k armor when the rest of the party can afford 12.5. That's +5 vs +3. doubled is +4 to AC.
It means you can afford 100k Sword vs 50k for the rest of the party. That's a +7 weapon vs a +5.
It means that, at the end of the game, You can get +10 armor, +10 shield, and +10 sword for 200k gp, while the rest of the party is spending 400k gp. What else are you doing with that extra 200k gp? Nothing?
The Crafting feats allow you to a) get stuff a couple to four levels sooner then you might otherwise and b) allow you to get stuff at the same time as everyone else, exactly as you like...and then spend your savings on stuff they can't afford with your crafter savings.
200k of savings can buy a LOT of extra gear and loot. It's not just a +1 even at lower levels, except the VERY lowest of levels.
==Aelryinth
I have to admit: I usually do not like to agree with RD, but in this case he is correct. I ran the numbers and posted them once. I am not going to dig them up again.
Craft Wondrous Item amounts to a +1 an ability score modifier and a +1 to your resistance bonus.
Craft Magic Arms and Armor amounts to a +1 attack/damage, +1armor bonus, and +1 shield bonus.
The other feats give you even less.
This is not gamebreaking IMO. A bit better than most other feats? yes. Rediculously better? No.
This still ignores that crafters will normally not spread out their crafting to all the different branches they could craft for equally, but will rather specialize in the one or two things which give them the most bang for their buck. Which normally ends up in exorbitant spell DCs, attack rolls, saving throws or armor classes, whichever the player prefers.
With that said, I do believe the crafting system could use a major revision to clean up inconsistencies, craft DCs etc. But we are not going to see that in this version.
The WBL FAQ is to prevent non-crafters from benefiting from the crafter's feats. Prior to that FAQ a crafter's fellow PCs could tell the crafter to craft for them. Thus benefiting the party with a bonus feat that they did not earn, do not have, and should not have.
Crafting is INTENDED to increase the power of the crafter's magic items relative to the rest of the party. After all, he spent a feat on it didn't he? They did not.- Gauss
And how exactly does one explain that in terms of the current actual text of the rules? "Sorry, your crafting fizzles out as you try to craft a better sword for your Barbarian comrade. You hear a loud laugh from the heavens and see the letters "SKR" mysteriously flicker over the nightsky"?
I am actually in agreement that restricting the actual crafting to the player who takes the feat would be a half-way decent solution, but there are several factors under the current, standing rules which make this FAQ ruling difficult to explain and implement.
a.) This FAQ ruling massively favors casters over non-casters, as using magic item crafting as a non-caster is restricted by the missing access to spells, access to Spellcraft as a class skill and the additional investment of feats and skill ranks into being able to use the Master Craftsman feat, compared to spellcasters, who do not have to pay that additional tax.
Believe me, I liked the image of Bruenor Battlehammer crafting Aegis-fang as much as anyone else, but to make that viable without screwing non-casters furthermore over, you'd have to remove the entry barriers as they are.
b.) There is no current in-lore explanation why suddenly crafting for others is not possible anymore. Paizo should provide one as such, instead of just issueing a pretty arbitrary ruling without lore support.
c.) Letting NPCs craft for PCs suddenly looks much more forbidding, since if PCs can only craft for themselves, why can NPCs craft for other people?
Gauss, I am aware that the bizarre, nonsensical crafting pricing rules are a poor and misguided attempt to enforce game balance.
I think they're neither misguided nor nonsensical as attempts to bring game balance. I just think some of the assumptions made were and are incorrect as far as presenting a balanced system. My personal favorite examples are the ring of shooting stars and the Big 6.
In PF, the ring of shooting stars has a whopping 50,000 gp market value. It has some mildly interesting abilities of limited usefulness. The same money will also get you a ring of protection +5. Which is your typical player going to choose? The ease of finding/making specific items, the cheapness of the standard bonus items, the ease of selling more expensive, premium priced, multi-function items, all contribute to PCs selling anything moderately interesting in favor of the utilitarian Big 6.
Contrast with 1e prices. The ring of shooting stars is 15,000 gp, the ring of protection ranges from 10,000 for a +1 to 20,000 for some quirky +6 AC, +2 to saves versions. The lowliest of rings is only 1/3 cheaper than the ring of shooting stars - a more appropriate value considering their relative utility.
I won't fault the 3e designers for trying to come up with a workable system. I just believe they made a lot of mistakes in gauging relative values of magic items. I think they started with some good principles - making defensive items cheaper than offensive, for example - but stable bonus items (the Big 6) are generally too cheap for their utility. In a game in which magic items were rare or under referee control, this might not be a problem. But in standard 3x/PF, it's a recipe for the dull but effective pursuit of the Big 6.
Crafting is INTENDED to increase the power of the crafter's magic items relative to the rest of the party. After all, he spent a feat on it didn't he? They did not.- Gauss
I think that's a faulty assumption. Crafting is intended, I believe, to convert unwanted treasure into desired treasure. Selling for half market value and crafting for half market value enables that 18,000 gp +3 long sword found in the dungeon to be converted into a +3 great axe for little extra input other than time. The DM's treasure placing calculations, designed to WBL guidelines, are preserved virtually no matter what the crafter transforms that treasure into.
This is also why crafting feats generally don't lead to the crafter having twice the WBL compared to other PCs. All of the treasure would have to come in cash form for this to be true and that's not typically the case.
I can't believe someone is complaining the skill changes hurt the wizard. It's nothing but a bonus. A wizard can now actually be good a skills that aren't class skills.
The class that actually take hit from this is the rogue. They had the most skill point and still do. Problem is they have few skills to spend them on. Not a big deal really, just means they can cover more skills. The real problem is so can everyone else. The +3 for a skill being a class skill become meaningless at higher levels when a DV is 25 and the rogue had +28 and while the other guy has +25.
If you want to complain about class getting screwed by the change that's the rogue. With fighters getting weapon training the AC for higher CR monsters went up. So the fighter kept up but the rogue while he can sneak attack more can't hit. I find it's like they applied a -5 to hit to the rogue at CR 15+ encounters.
The Wizard gained with the conversion, maybe not as much as the fighter or other classes but the rogue actually lost a lot but it only shows up after 12th level. I put in house rule adding sneak attack precision at level 3 that gives +1 to hit on sneak attacks and increase by +1 every 4 levels so by level 19 you have +5 to hit on sneak attacks.
I found no one in my games no one would take rouge beyond level 12. Once they had improved evasion there wasn't much reason. usually fighter was taken so bonus feat could be used for combat and the class feat used to take Extra Rogue Talents.
Technically cash should be a premium in most campaigns. While the PCs probably have enough to cover consumables and some NPC casting/crafting but the bulk of PC wealth is going to be in the form of magical items that the PCs can only really sell at 1/2 rate in order to gain the cash to craft their own items.
Sell an item worth 100k at 50k and you have 50k to produce an item worth 100k which is a net savings of 0.
Basically this is designed to allow the PCs to convert unwanted vendor trash items into other more valued items.
Personally I kinda like using a residuum type system like that used in 4e where unwanted items can be directly converted into a substance of some monetary value so you don't even need to mess with the trying to find a vendor willing to buy you vendor trash.
The problem with PC crafting really only comes up in settings where there is a great deal of cash or conversion of vendor trash to cash is at a better than 50% ratio.
It's still possible, but that's after creation which is post WBL. WBL pretty much only refers to the initial kitting out of a character which is supposed to be done without referencing the feats of someone else's charcater.
If you want to ignore that provision... THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE AND OKAY TO DO SO. You're the GM of your own game, SKR, nor anyone else on the Paizo staff is going to beat down your door to police how you run it. The answers they give are meant for defacto assumptions, In all the campaigns I've played in under home GM's I've yet to see ONE who did not tweak the default to suit his or her taste.
In the Pre-Internet days we all did our own home grown rules keeping. It only became a concern when GM's start losing confidence in their own decision making ability and started looking for validation in message board forums or when you started to get a rising sense of player entitlement and GM disenfrancisement.
No. This ruling is a still pretty recent development, from January 2012 to be exact. There were no official rules saying "magic item crafting is only supposed to benefit the crafter" in 3.0 and 3.5 and not for the first two+ years of Pathfinder, either. As such, it would behoove the Paizo writing staff to issue an in-lore reason which addresses the points I made a few posts above, because otherwise the ruling reeks of "because I say so"'ism, instead of making sense in an in-game environment.
Also, just re-reading the ruling now, it may well be that Gauss is making a very interpretative reading of the FAQ entry. Nowhere I can see SKR is stating that item crafting can only benefit the crafter. While the ruling says that you have to take items for the crafter at their cost when calculating the entire WBL of the party, saying that this means that this is a statement about who can benefit from one PC taking a crafting feat is very much interpretation, instead of a literal reading of that FAQ entry.
As such, please take my assumptions above with a grain of salt, unless Gauss can produce further clarification from SKR or Jason Bulman.
The problem with PC crafting really only comes up in settings where there is a great deal of cash or conversion of vendor trash to cash is at a better than 50% ratio.
Like APs?
|
I think it's absolutely hilarious that this thread has produced not one, but TWO derails completely unrelated to the subject of the original post.
THREE if you count the viability of 4-wizard parties and the reasonability of 15-round combats as two separate derails.
My two cents:
1. PF Wizards are still plenty of fun, and the changes to the skill system actually help them out a ton.
2. A party of four wizards can be awesome, even in combat-heavy adventures. They'll need to coordinate very well as a group to cover each other's weaknesses, though.
3. 15 round combats are crazy. 10 15 round combats in a day is double crazy. Almost nobody except Azaelas Fayth plays this way, so it doesn't much matter whether four wizards can survive it. Four smart wizards would sit on horses, spam summoned creatures into the camp, and then ride away. Then they'd come back and do it again every day until all the goblins were dead.
4. The crafting rules are complicated, and it can be hard for a GM to learn how to deal with their effects. They're only really a problem if players want to get competitive and try to use them to screw each other and the GM over. But if you have players who actually like each other and a GM who is flexible but firm, they're not a big deal.