CastleMike's page

Would I keep the item after acquiring it on an adventure and possibly enjoying using it for that adventure before trading it for gold or another item with more utility at basically half the item market price?

Would I want the item enough to have someone in the party craft it or purchase the item using suggested default wealth by level guidelines? Look at comparably priced items.

IMO most of the fluff regarding items is associated with the item because of the adventures around the item as it was acquired by the party which occassionally has something to do with it's history in the campaign.

Probably depends on your campaign record keeping requirements and whether canned adventures are used in the campaign. Old school I'm used to mapping.

So many campaigns use some type of dungeon delving on some kind of regular basis even if you had to do some investigating and travelling to get there. It seems like the BBEGs are usually headquartered or encountered in a large lair of some sort cavern, dungeon, csstle or other lair the PCs need to explore.

In most but not all of my canned adventures the dungeon is rarely larger than 650' from the entrance.

The Skein allows fast party exits without getting lost with a party just running away from an encounter they probably wouldn't survive possibly due to injuries and lack of healing resources by simply following the bearer of the skein.

Particularly nice if you tie it at some point after entering cavern, dungeon, lair which really extends it's "dungeon" range at 650'. The party only gets 750 GP if you sell this and it has a lot of utility for entering dungeons. Lot of utility for a party for the price compared to what they could sell it for and then purchase for 750 GP.

Makes my top five. Lot of flavor and utility to cost since item seems cheap for what it does. Hard to image a lot of parties trading away this item if found adventuring. Nifty item for crafting parties.

Very interesting item especially the name (cudos), but it seems like it would be of marginal utility to most PCs not in high wealth high magic campaigns. Basically not a keeper party treasure, IMO most parties would sell or trade it for magical items of more utility except in low magic campaigns where magic items are rare and hard to acquire. At low to mid levels I'd rather have a magical haversack to hold my things or a magic weapon for everyone in the party so everyone in the party can hit things or an elven cloak or several wands of utilty spells like cure light or sleep or invisibility potions.

Makes my top five but this is really abusable by PCs IMO, particularly sorcerers in high level play that use party crafting. Basically a sorcerer could charm an NPC to break the wishbone and have them choose to forego their save so DC17 moot. Is it worth 5,000 or 10,000 GP to most sorcerers to have an extra high level spell or two? Breaking the curse doesn't appear to destroy the wishbone so that is another way around the spell limitation of the sorcerer class since it doesn't appear to have a wishbone limitation:

This memory loss cannot be dispelled, but it can be restored with a break enchantment, limited wish, miracle, or wish spell.

Interesting but to pricey for what it does IMO. Really cool item if the the same effect was based on the Rope Trick spell using rags instead of rope which would provide a major reduced cost plus wouldn't need arcane eye since you can see out of a rope trick.

I like the concept of the retort since I dislike poison use in the game but not the time mechanics and restraints of the retort which basically make usage very limited in most campaigns. Be a lot more useful if the antidote didn't expire after an hour, possibly just providing a generic anti toxin with specified mechanical benefits. Really nifty item in a campaign using long term poisons or if it treated long term natural poisoning like lead or a similar campaign poison effect.

Interesting item especially at high level play. The drinking the blood reminds me of a suped up all level Psychic Reformation without the experience point cost. That effect could basically could be duplicated with the Limited Wish required to make this item in most campaigns and losing the appropiate experience points for each level. Regarding crafting the item. If the crafter can cast Limited Wish or acquire Limited Wish reliably they can also find a sorcerer with the desired bloodline to craft this item.

Most parties have a cleric or access to a NPC caster capable of casting the appropiate spell so the permanent negative level not much of a penalty in most campaigns.

SGenerally most players choose their bloodlines in campaigns and do not have them randomly assigned by their GM so it seems odd how selectively beneficial the supression of the bloodline is. For the price I would think it would be complete:

Upon removing the necklace, it takes one hour for the character's original bloodline powers to return; during this time, all the sorcerer's bloodline powers are suppressed. The ampoule has no effect on the character's bonus spells, bloodline arcana, or bonus feats from his original bloodline.

Makes my top 5. I don't like the Make Whole aspect of the bag and believe it would be better without that, just to situational for most games.

I agree with Electryc it also forces the GM to basically provide the party a "Mass Sanctuary" spell and specifically not target the PC who needs the Heal. Very Odd that the "Heal" spell is not required to craft this item.

Yes (Toned downwards)

Several options:

One nice simple and easy is to Gestalt it with the Adept class for some minor Wisdom based spellcasting.

A second option is to apply the Variant Psychic Rogue psionics based on Wisdom mechanic 100 PP and 15 first to fifth level psionic powers known at L20 sort of an unarmored variant of the Psychic Warrior the Psychic Monk (Martial Artist).

At 5, 10, 15 and 20 give it the equivalent of a level in the Martial Adept Swordsage class.

At L6 change BAB to Full BAB like a Fighter for those 15 levels.

At L7, L10, L13, L16 and L19 give it the benefits equivalent to a PRC Tattooed Monk Tattoo.

I'd like to see a graduated gestalt leveling to Half-Dragon Apothesis at L20 similar to the Dread Necromancer Lich Apothesis at L20.

You can keep them LG, make them LN or a mix of the two based on the variant SRD alignment Paladins (Freedom, Slaughter, And Tyranny).

LogicNinja wrote:

So anyone with Craft Wondrous Item nearly doubles their, and the whole party's, wealth? THIS IS PERFECTLY BALANCED WITH NO FLAWS WHATSOEVER

The D&D economic system is incredibly shaky, XP costs or no XP costs. DMs can (and do) arbitrarily limit the amount of free time and money that characters have available, so the whole idea of "doubling your money" is moot except at character creation time, if your DM allows pre-crafting items before play begins. XP costs have never been the limiting factor. YMMV, of course.

IMO it's bad game design just limited to core mechanics unless the game has no down time, crafting experience costs act as a break on crafting abuse in game in a default campaign that utilizes the suggested wealth by level rules or low magic campaigns. Throw in access to a feat like Mercantile Background and it really starts shaking things up.

To paraphrase selling a magic item of marginal utility to a party for 75% of market to have the crafter make 150% of custom magic desired by the party.

Under the basic rules party finds a 100K magical treasure that is of marginal utility to the party they sell it for half market price 50K and purchase items they want at market price. In campaigns where they cannot purchase items someone takes a crafting feat and turns the 50K into 100 K of magic items specifically desired by the party.

Throw in a feat like Mercantile Background the party gets 75K which they craft into 150K of magic items they specifically desire.

Doubling the magic items of BBEGs increases their CRs by 1 or 2.

Can a DM/GM compensate for this more optimized party by giving them less wealth? Sure but there was no reason to before the unnecessary rule change.

The WotC writer who designed the Abjurant Champion even thought that Mage Armor was an Abjuration spell, and it should be, IMO. So it really doesn't fit as a Conjuration spell, or specialist ability.

Defintely an example of bad game design from the designer on up through all the various reviewers not being familiar with the schools of magic the specific spells belonged to which the PRC was supposed to effect.

Looks like most D20 Noble class PCs with D8, 6 SPs, average BAB and some class specials.

I don't like the Chaotic alignment restriction there is no good reason a Noble should not able to be Chaotic plenty of Nobles are born to a life of privilege.

Why is the class restricted to Light Armor that commoners and thieves wear instead of heavy armor?

As I recall the Antimagic Torc was 25,000 gp market and usable 1/day. Prorate that down to 1/10 days like the mechanic for Gates/Portals and now you have a relatively inexpensive 2,500 gp permanent magic item capable of casting Anti Magic 1/Ride (10 days).

Understand how various spells interact with the Antimagic spell and other spells in your campaign.

Go first.

Antimagic torcs are nice for personal protection for non casters.

Magic items or weapons that can cast antimagic as a spell are nice.

Antimagic cast on your familiar can do the trick (takes more time to have the familiar sneak up on the spellcaster)

Original spell research to tweak the Antimagic spell to change the area from you to an object like a missile weapon is nice.

I did with a variant Spellcaster and a Wizard before there was the Beguiler class and it worked well.

Works great with a Beguiler and a Wizard going Ultimate Magus.

I'd suggest +7 LA or less for a DR 0 unless it is giving the new demigod the 20D8 outsider HD like St. Cuthbert has but Vecna does not since both were humans at one point who ascended.

Sold my Faiths and Pantheons the other day but as I recall the Chosen of Bane was only a +7 LA which would probably be higher using the calculator.

The Paizo warlock should be able to cast a limited amount of spells from a spell book like a wizard along with blood line abilities like a sorcerer. He should receive a familiar which picks up the Fiendish template regardless of whether he or the familiar is evil due to his heritage. If the spellcasting option isn't popular he should get cool abilities like the Hellfire Warlock PRC for modifying his blasts.

A lot depends on what level you play and if you use standard DMG demographics for NPCs in game.

There is always the Battle Sorcerer variant or the old standby the Eldritch Knight although there are plenty of better PRCs after years of source books unless it has to have +20 BAB at L20.

FRCS Paladins and Rangers of Mystra have the ability to cast spells from a spell book by taking a feat. No reason other Rangers and Paladins of Gods of Magic shouldn't be able to do the same.

Well, I agree with you about the Sorcerer. I personally dont think ANY class should get less than 4 + Int.

I also usually play high int Rogues, so Wizards never get me. Believe me, if Knowledge (all) was available to Rogues, I'd just play a high Int rogue "loremaster". If I could stand Bards, I'd do that.

Actually the new Paizo Bard looks pretty cool. Maybe I'll ask my GM to let me play one of them in the Ptolus game is is about to kick off.

Lewis

Take the Educated feat with your Rogue it makes all knowledge skills class skills.

Eh... DRM encoded CDs are worse than useless in my book. Now that I think of it, the pirates already have the PDF, why not put it on a CD in the back of the book?

IMO additional profits. With a pdf in the back of the book there is a slighter higher publishing cost plus now additional second copy electronic format sales are minimized both lower profits.

A CD in the back of the book is worse from the POV of the publisher because people can easily copy/ pirate the PDF file on the disk anonymously. If you have people purchase and download a PDF then you can stamp their name on the PDF and track who copied it.

Overall about the only way is a sealed serial number but even that is expensive attaching a sealed card to each book. People could steal the codes but it would be obvious to the buyer.

Yes with the cheapest cd pdf version that is true. There are various options in security in various price ranges.

For every guy that can break a coded security cd there are at least 10 or more with scanners. Plenty of the D&D market has access to a scanner. All it takes is one person with a scanner and some time. Throw a few more people with time into the mix. Generally the market aged 18 and under will have the most free time to use one especially when it is cost prohibitive to purchase a pdf.

I'm old school there are costs associated with printing a book and distributing it to the wholesalers and the retailers and finally to the customer. By the time a book is printed now a days a pdf copy normally exists.

The 4E PHB PDF is $24.95 at RPG Now. The 4E PHB hardcopy retails for $34.95 but sells for $23.07 from Amazon and $19.04 + $3.99 shipping New from secondary Amazon retailers. All the Amazon retailers are making a profit despite additional shipping costs.

This is the same information. Some people prefer it hardcopy others prefer their information electronic and some like a combination of the two usually based on their preferred methods of interfacing with the information.

Wizards did initially plan to include codes that could be entered in DDI for access to the books. However, that plan was infeasible as there was no way to protect the codes from "casual pirating" (i.e. walking into the store and getting the codes from the books, either screwing with the potential real customer whose code would no longer function or the storeowner).

That makes sense, but nothing in there stops WotC from selling the PDFs at $5-10 apiece. Charging more for the PDFs than it costs to buy them off of a site like Amazon is kind of ridiculous.

The code idea was cheesy. Pretty easy to include a CD with a PDF copy of the book in the back and anything else they wanted to push.

Regarding the last simple greed (Maximize profits without printing costs) seems to prohibit charging $5-10 a pdf until the stuff is really old. Probably some truth regarding the major distributors like Amazon requiring the pdf to be priced higher than the hard copy Paizo and Wotc PDFs are almost always priced higher than the Amazon hard copy.

Getting an additional higher level spell 1 level earlier is not huge. With the additions the sorceror is getting, its going to make a wizard redundant. I yet to fathom how the arcane bond is darn good, so I might be missing something. In order to add stuff to your bond, you still pay for it(just like any other magic item, just at 1/2 price). Am I missing something else there, and I very well might be!?!?

As far as power, the wizard can cast only 4 spells per day at 20th plus their int modifier. As Sorceror at 20 can cast 6 per day plus their charisma modifier. Their only limitation is the 5 known spells per level, and this is not even true because bloodlines add another for 6 now.

It depends on what level you normally play. I notice your example cites a level 20 sorcerer where there is no issue since both classes have leveled up.

At low levels 1-7 this is a "huge" factor for a sorcerer with a limited fixed known spell list.

The single worst Pathfinder rule change at this point IMO which needs serious playtesting and feedback is the no experience crafting after L5+ particularly high level campaigns L13+ in suggested wealth by level campaigns.

The No Experience Crafting rule breaks the CR mechanic the game is based on using suggested wealth by level without the associated experience cost brake on crafting abuse.

All that free extra magical wealth for a single feat for all party members compared to existing rules with via Craft Wondrous Item or the Leadership feat to obtain a NPC party crafter effectively makes the PCs higher level against standard CR encounters.

IMO that ability has to be clarified quite a bit better by Pazio.

By getting rid of the XP cost for the craft item feats, you are throwing off the balance of the CR/EL system more tremendously than any other change I've seen you make to the system.

I agree with you and Bleach. This single sentence really sums up the problem with the proposed rule.

Under this proposed rule change a single PC feat really throws outs the balance of the CR/EL system.

With the Leadership feat a single PC can have a NPC Cohort with lots of Crafting feats basically doubling effective PARTY WEALTH instead of bumping up individual and party wealth because there is no 1/25th market cost experience break.

A single PC feat like Craft Wondrous Item which is already strong becomes broken because there is no crafting experience brake against abuse. In any game starting with a few or more levels a single PC can take the Craft Wondrous Item feat and have everyone in the party double all their Craft Wondrous Items wealth since they have been adventuring together since first level. Suggested wealth by level is 9,000 GP at L5 and 760,000 GP at L20.

Multiclassing into sorcerers has always been a problem for me as a DM. In the PHB they talk about how a sorceror's magic is natural, manifesting during the sorceror's youth. So yeah, how do you explain the 8th level Fighter suddenly realizing he's natural magic?

Basically anyone able to achieve a high enough Charisma some way 10+ for cantrips and 11+ for first level spells has the latent potential to become a sorcerer.

The L8 Fighter could have had it awakened on an adventurer by a creature or magic item or local magical effect or made a deal with a sorcerer to awakenen his sorcereous potential.

Shoot a Fighter - 8, Sorcerer - 1 with a normal Charisma of 6 who possesses a +6 Cloak of Charisma could be trained to cast spells as long as he possesses an item that boosts his charisma like the cloak losing spellcasting when losing the benefits of the item.

If you make a wand of stoneskin then yes you had to have had material components for fifty castings of the spell.

Yes that is correct for a wand of stoneskin but we were discussing permanent item enchantments in the last several posts. Now is that standard applied to all permanent magical items at 1,000 gp market crafting costs with daily castings for enchantment?

I disagree it was implied that most spells were being cast daily for each 1,000 gp market price of casting, but checking the spells that require expensive material components or experience points used in crafting it easy to see that standard was not applied.

Additionally, one crazy suggestion in line with the Arcane Bond issue of the wizard: since the wizard arcane bond now steps on the sorcerer’s toes by allowing a spontaneous cast once a day, perhaps the sorcerer arcane bond should step on the wizard’s toes and allow any one fixed arcane spell?

As in, each morning the sorcerer could place in his bonded item any single spell from the entire arcane list of a level he was able to cast (yes if it had expensive material components he would have to...

The Shair and Shaman are both nice mechanics with the Gen or the Spirit Guide.

I like letting Sorcerers take Any Spell or Any Spell (Greater) with a spell book for a little more spell versatility with the 15 minute time penalty to prepare the spell like a wizard would with an open spell slot.

An easy method is to just double the known spells by giving the NPC wizard the Collegiate Wizard feat from Complete Arcane.

As professional spellcasters it is reasonable that much of a NPC Wizard's Suggested Wealth by Level would be additional known spells utility spells particularly low level first (generally 25 gp market) and second (generally 150 gp market) that NPCs would actually occasionally wish cast on their behalf.

I mentioned arcane bond, a lot of people like that and would take arcane bond just for that. Personally I prefer flavor over power gaming so I went with draconic :)

Flavor choosing your Cake: Which class to play like a spellcasting sorcerer over a cleric, druid, fighter, monk, rogue or wizard.

Additional Flavor Not Powergaming: Choosing the Frosting for the cake picking a bloodline for your sorcerer.

What is a sorcerer? a wizard who not need study but practice, with more spells daily?

The Sorcerer need a change, a core for the class. I don't know while, but in the present Alpha 3, it's a 2nd class wizard.

The Sorcerer need more power, the bloodlines its a good idea, but they don't reaches at school power, maybe if gain a blooline power at every even level.

The feats and power not to melee combat, the Sorcerer not enought Hit Points, no Base attack, and probably not the AC for a melee combat.

What is a sorcerer? That question really nails it because the class is perceived so differently by so many different DMs and Players.

I would like to see futher improvement in the class with more variants so it is more fun to play a PF sorcerer. IMO Paizo isn't quite there yet with the sorcerer class.

Why not play a SRD variant spellcaster or a PHBII Beguiler with backwards compatibility? Both are easier to play than a PF sorcerer since the abilites are fixed or chosen by the player?

The Alpha 3 sorcerer is improved over the Alpha 2 and almost anything is an improvement over the base core class sorcerer like granting them all the bonus feats PF dropped from the game every few levels which wouldn't necessarily make the class more fun to play.

The Alpha 3 still pales when compared to a 3.5 SRD Spellcaster with open bonus feats at levels 1, 5, 10, 15 and 20 IMO with most of the feat options in game.

I would like to see a few more PF sorcerer playing options based on the 3.5 SRD Variant Spellcaster mechanically so there will be something that will appeal to most players.

IMO adding a skill point variant side note which grants the sorcerer and a few other classes 3 or 4 skill points a level is a no brainer. It appeases everyone as an "Optional" rule and it makes it easy for a DM to keep it out of his or her game if he finds it unbalancing or bad for backwards compatibility.

The PF Blood line are nice but overkill IMO because there are to many. Consider limiting them to 3 or even 4 of the most popular as they will be the ones that will generally see the most play in games.

Additional variant bloodlines can be introduced in future gaming supplements using BBEG Bloodline Sorcerers which is great for backwards compatibility since those bloodlines will always be optional for a DM.

Strongly consider dropping the less popular bloodlines to provide "other" sorcerer class role playing options in game which will appeal to more players.

The PF Gish Battle Sorcerer Variant is popular particularly with players who enjoy mixing it up in melee and playing with fewer known spells and daily spellcasting. This variant also takes up less space than one of the weaker IMO PF "filler" bloodlines.

Consider something like Two "Spellcaster Sorcerer" Variants which take up less space than one of current PF sorcerer bloodlines:

One who gets a choice of a bonus known spell each time he levels for players who thinks sorcerers need a spell boost instead of a PF Bloodline.

For players who really dislike the delayed spellcasting progression and don't like playing Koblold monsters or the option of standard spellcasting spellcasting progression comparable to standard fullcasters with additional known spells.

I only did one playtest with a 6th level wizard, but I do agree with all three of Squirrelloid's points.

The free spell per day was powerful. However, I did greatly enjoy the flexiblity of knowing that once a day I could pull any spell out of my book. I think it added to the game experience, and should be kept. Essentially, it just saved me the cost of making a bunch of backup scrolls. Still, it is an significant bump in power and steps on the sorcerer's toes.

The cheap item creation was huge. I like the idea of being able to make one item without having the feats....but making it cheap was over the top.

In the end, I did end up feeling that the wizard was fine before...so with this plus the school powers they were given - they are far outclassing the Sorcerer. Yes I realize that the Arcane bloodline gives a sorcerer this bond option as well, but it doesn't mean as much to the sorcerer as it does to the wizard - the sorcerer never has to worry about not picking the right spells for the day...and doesn't have many to choose from anyway.

So...yes, maybe all of the changes do make the wizard balance better compared to the cleric or druid....but I think he has stretched out his lead over the sorcerer.

Excellent post I agree with all your points.

Item Creation is Huge and Game Breaking IMO especially at higher levels with more party wealth and no experience point cost to provide a break.

Sitting on the fence between #8 and #9 initially before shifting to #6 after review never really cared for tactical mini games which is how 4E feels to me.

I agree there is no reason the Battle Sorcerer variant shouldn't be tweaked with an optional paragraph for PF mechanics when pages are being devoted to blood line abilities.

Seriously, is this skill necessary? The rules were flying were not that difficult to follow before. I think it adds add an unnecessary layer of complexity to the game to have this as a skill. Does anyone disagree with me?

Very doubtful the skill is necessary IMO. Where is the corresponding walk and run skill?

More known spells for the sorcerer because they are spontaneous spellcasters. Preferably at least ten more known spells at L18 (one of each level gained at leveling or at L2 (Bonus known cantrip), L4 (Bonus knonw first level spell), L6.......) if backwards compatibility that great of an issue. Mechanically something as simple as a Sorcerous Spell Mastery feat based on Charisma would do the trick.

Consider including an "optional" skill rule variant for GMs who run heavier skill oriented campaigns. All classes will receive one extra skill point compared to base classes and PRCs.

I like lower magic campaigns so masterwork weapons and armor are important to my players. The current flat +150 for armor and +300 for weapons simply result in weird prices.

* A masterwork dagger costs 302, that's 151x the cost of a regular dagger.
* A masterwork repeating heavy crossbow costs 700, that's less than double.

* A masterwork suit of leather armor costs 160, that's 16x the cost or regular leather armor.
* A masterwork suit of full plate costs 1,650, that a mere 10% bump.

I would really like to see masterwork items prices as a multiple of regular items. I don't really care what multiple, but all masterwork items should be double or triple or quadruple the price of their regular counterparts.

Now, what I'd REALLY like to see is an expanded masterwork selection:

Masterwork quality - +2 modifier, x5 cost
High quality - +1 mod, x2 cost
Average quality
Low quality - -1 mod, 1/2 price if you can get anyone to buy this crap.
Inferior quality - -2 mod, unsellable without a Bluff

I agree. It sounds like Harn regarding the item quality effects. I would also like to see a flat two to four times cost multiplier for Masterwork items for the reasons you have cited.

Lot of good points particularly the skill limits at first level and the implications of the Open Minded feat under PF rules for some skill dipping.

Open Minded [General]
You are naturally able to reroute your memory, mind, and skill expertise.

Benefit
You immediately gain an extra 5 skill points. You spend these skill points as normal. If you spend them on a cross-class skills they count as ½ ranks. You cannot exceed the normal maximum ranks for your level in any skill.

Special
You can gain this feat multiple times. Each time, you immediately gain another 5 skill points.

I always figured crafting magic items drained a little bit of life force which explained the cost mechanic for in game purposes.

A house costs 1,000 gp plus in game.

Crafting a permanent magic itme is grabbing a little bit of immortality in the game world. A permanent magic item to remind people your PC had come before them.

Wintergreen wrote:

So am I missing something when I look at the new system and think "At first level it is less customisable and versatile and it doesn't make designing high level characters any easier so why reject the 4x skill points at 1st level?"

As I see there are some reasons because this system if better to make high level characters:

-- Max ranks are your character level. For both, class and cross class
-- You don't have to care about 1/2 ranks.
-- If your NPC is multiclass you don't have to worry about when he gets the ranks in order to apply 1/2 ranks.
-- You don't have to worry about INT increases in level 4, 8 ... since they spread skill points retroactively.

All this is possible because now the 4x skill has changed to +3 for class skills, and made possible to get rid of 1/2 ranks.

Consider a real multiclasser skill monkey with the PF skill system and backwards compatibility.

Something like a Changeling Rogue - 1 with 10 skill points a level, Factotum - 1 (All skills become class skills now and receive the PF +3 skill benefit which is like getting first level times 4 multiplier at more than first level whenever assigning a single rank to a skill for a dip which is much better than a mere 1/2 skill rank because quite a few skills have a DC15 sweetpoint range), Bard - 1, Cloistered Cleric Variant - 1, Swordsage - 1.

5 class levels with base 10 + 6 + 6 + 6 +6 skills per class level probably with a PC with a decent Intelligence modifier to have even more skills.

Changeling Rogue -1 and Factotum -1 is huge now at L2 for a skill monkey dipper probably with an Intelligence 14+ using the default array or 25 point buy with each single skill point getting the +3 class skill bonus first because of the freebie multiplier and second because of the DC 15 sweet spot for many skill checks.

The kicker is just because some people won't use that in their game doesn't make it illegal or broken for use in a game under the rules.

But this system doesn't penalize this, it only makes you wait to level 2 to do that.

So, you have to wait some few levels to invest in cross classing, but the result is better because you don't have the 1/2 cross class cost.

I don't understand this kind of reasoning. You admit the PC has to wait and go without the access to the skills for a few levels but that isn't a penalty in game because eventually he could be better with a skill when he finally acquires it.

My example was clear PF penalizes a PC who would normally diversify some of his skill points with minimal skill ranks in a breadth of less critical ranks.

The wait is a penalty in a PF game in a skill oriented campaign. Being denied the opportunity to not diversify skills as desired and be forced to maximize is a penalty because the PC Rogue or other PC rarely needs all his skills maximized with all the magic available in the game.

Being denied that opportunity to diversify skills is a penalty.

Rarely is more than a single 1/2 rank or single rank of Appraise needed in most games at low levels. Most rare items are only a DC15 check with Exotic items at DC20 or higher.

In 3.5 a Rogue could open up 8 knowledge skills with a 1/2 rank and use them trained for 8 skill points at first level with 6 skills maximized that's 14 skills before any racial or intelligence modifiers. That can be huge at low levels of play particularly without a Bard i the party. Basically the Rogue can act as a party Sage at low levels. Throw in human with a positve intelligence modifier and quite a few more class or cross class skills could be opened up by the PC.

Between other party members, attribute bonuses, class options, spells and magic options in game all PC skills don't need to be maximized plenty of skills work just fine in game with a 1/2 rank or a few ranks.