| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My first avatar was chosen because she looks a little like me... But I never liked the horrified expression , I switched to...
Search Posts
...you can post as an old alias and feel all nostalgic for those earlier simpler times.
Oooh I love that comic! My take...
-Since I have no recollection of them using natural weapons, I am going to say the sharp bits aren't weapons.
It did take an amazingly long time to craft advanced armor and weapons in historical times. Also the craftsmen doing so were probably working on a salary rather than by piece. In a game if you want to speed things up try removing the cost of the material from the time to construct. For example, mithril is rare and that is why it is expensive. But that shouldn't affect time to craft things from it. I haven't tested this idea. If you do try it let me know how it worked out.
TOZ... that could backfire badly. Why not simply ask the guy himself? Ask him what his character's motivation is. If he is unenthusiastic it may be that he thinks you already know. Part of a good background is their reason to be out there facing danger and the likely possibility of a violent death. If protecting others is his motivation then give him people in need of protection like has been suggested. But just ask the guy first. He probably has a motivation that he just hasn't put into words yet. This is why I always add a line to describe your character's motivation on the character sheet. So you can think about it during character creation. Heck I even have a deck of cards with random motivations just in case you have writers block.
The rogue is not competing with the wizard, and even if he was the wizard could craft all of the rogue's items, and the rogue is still 20000 leagues behind the wizard. If your argument is based on balancing then the rogue just needs a complete rewrite. You honestly want to argue that the rogue should be the only one getting free crafting, because his class sucks? Sorry I don't see it. You're writing to someone who likes the Rogues in Pathfinder.
The rogue is not competing with the wizard, and even if he was the wizard could craft all of the rogue's items, and the rogue is still 20000 leagues behind the wizard. If your argument is based on balancing then the rogue just needs a complete rewrite. That is fairly off topic. If the rogue were THAT badly written then nobody would play one. This isn't a discussion of how balanced the various classes are. It is a discussion about the fairness of charging for item crafting.
There are problems with your viewpoint. First is what you call "party business". Everyone can agree that crafting wands of cure light wounds is party business and should be done free of charge. But crafting a personal item for the rogue is NOT party business. Sure that new sword makes the rogue more effective. But that is the rogue's business not the wizard's. If you are trying to keep the characters balanced against each other, then the wizard should definitely be charging the rogue for that new sword. The crafting feats grant a boost in item wealth at the cost of a feat. It is balanced if you only use it on yourself. You give up combat/casting feats to have better gear. The balance issue comes when you use it for others. They didn't give up any feats, so while you reduced your overall effectiveness in feats to have better effectiveness in gear, they get better effectiveness in gear at no cost at all. Everyone will have similarly boosted gear but the wizard will be the only one out a number of feats. To keep things balanced the others should be paying for their personal gear that the wizard crafts. This will keep the wizards gear better than the rest of the party because he has more money to spend on it. But HE paid the cost for that increase HE should retain it. Balance between PCs is maintained in this way. The argument that increasing the rogue's effectiveness boosts the party is a trick. Boosting the wizard's effectiveness does the very same thing. So doing things the way I described is just as effective at building party power, but it maintains the balance of power between these two characters. Your method increases the rogues power at the expense of his balance vs the wizard.
Eberron has to be my favorite so far.
Let me phrase this a different way to make you understand. The rogue can pick locks and pockets. So by your logic he should be robbing banks or markets or whatever and turning over the proceeds to the group during his off time. It would be selfish of him to not do so. The group won't be there to help, they aren't sneaky. You have to do it for the team.Can I play a rogue in your game? Pretty please? No, no, give credit where credit is due. This was an example of what Shifty's game must be like. The people in my game like discounted items. They really don't mind if a wizard has extra money as a result. That extra money in the wizard's pocket only ends up helping the group in the long run.
The treasure is already divided more or less equally depending on your method. This is OFF DUTY time we are talking about. You realize what this sounds like...
That is the message you are sending... very confusing right? So you can pay him if you want to but he is doing wrong if he charges up front? Make up your mind it's either ok to pay him or it isn't. Let me phrase this a different way to make you understand. The rogue can pick locks and pockets. So by your logic he should be robbing banks or markets or whatever and turning over the proceeds to the group during his off time. It would be selfish of him to not do so. The group won't be there to help, they aren't sneaky. You have to do it for the team.
You do realize that when you insult people they get upset don't you? I shouldn't have to explain that. I quoted you because you stated something in defense of the people who seem to think it's ok not to pay the party wizard for any work he might do for their character. Forgive me if you aren't actually on that side of the argument.
Meanwhile the Fighter is off training and everyone else has tough jobs to do as well... you seem to think only the Wizard has a job to do. He does his job, whilst the Barb is probably hitting the gym and doing endless sword drills. You seem to want to live in a very selective version of 'realistic'. What are you talking about? People can do what they want to in their free time. SO CAN THE WIZARD. It is in NO WAY wrong not to craft for others if you want to do other things with your time. Party politics are for when you are adventuring. If you want a service in your off time it is common courtesy to pay for that service, whether from a PC or a NPC. If the wizard wants to give a discount or give it away free is entirely his decision and not wrong in any way. Heck he can charge full price or more if his character doesn't like the other character. It is a free market. Here is your problem. That sword is worth 2000 gold. If you have two fighters who want a +1 sword. You found one such sword and a big pile of coins. In your case the fighter who gets the sword for 1000 gold out of the loot pile is robbing the other fighter, who now has to go into town and buy his for 2000 gold. You are giving that first fighter 1000 gold extra loot over the rest of the party by using this system. If there was a +1 sword and 4000 gold loot between the two and you divided it your way one fighter gets a +1 sword and 1500 gold, the other gets 2500 gold. But since he has to buy his sword he ends up with a +1 sword and 500 gold. The only fair way to divide it is to apply the FULL 2000 gold value to that sword, then BOTH end up with a +1 sword and 1000 gold.I would suggest that you have a strange view of the world. It seems set on who is 'robbing' whom and a whole lot of other entitlement mentality problems. Wow the blatant hypocrisy... it is YOUR side that is enraged at the thought that there might be an imbalance in wealth by level via charging for the creation of magic items. NOW you state that if an imbalance occurs because someone snagged a better lottery draw of items than someone else they should suck it up with a smile?! Do you even read what you write? Your the one with entitlement mental issues. All I did was point out the fairest way to divide treasure. I could care less if you actually use it. It takes a few seconds to jot down the values of all the items people grab. After the adventure is over it is only fair to deduct the full value of any claimed treasure from that persons final share. If he has more claimed stuff than he can afford out of his share of the gold then he can pony up the rest out of pocket or owe it against the haul from the next mission. I fail to see where this can in any way harm "what is best for the group", everyone is still using the items they found as best they can. If no one claimed that sword than sure it gets sold off and the whole group loses out on half its value. It is a wonder that you can't seem to grasp something as simple as the fact that you lose wealth by level the more you visit a NPC broker.
I was thinking about doing this for players that use strategy and teamwork, giving them a reward for working together after a while. Do you think this is game breaking? No it isn't game breaking. It may be fun to give a feat to represent the effort put in by the party as a team. I would structure that feat to mirror the type of teamwork they displayed. For example, if they have a clever way of setting up flanking then give them a bonus feat involving flanking.
It sounds like you solved your question already. To toss my opinion in late: Just respond both IN character and IN kind. If their character's are insulting yours then your character should insult theirs. Alternately you could take the higher road and spin this back on them. In character BE HURT emotionally by their insults. Ask the other PCs why the priest and princess are being so vile! If the group is seriously into role play then this second path can lead to a lot more friendly drama.
Have you read the rules? Crafting requires a LOT of time and effort. It IS an investment on the character's part. Just because a GM hand waves away the time and effort spent in his game doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Would you be fine with a PC abusing another one just because it doesn't affect time at the table. For example, the strong Barbarian being forced to work as a slave in a fellow PCs mine, because the GM hand waved away the time spent. You think he should be REQUIRED to support any use of their time away from adventuring any way the party wants regardless of whether it makes sense or not. AND you say they also shouldn't get compensated for this. WOW that's gall. They spent feats on equipment effectively... so YES they are just as capable as the wizard with spell penetration feats just in a different way. So HOW exactly are they carrying you?! How can you NOT see what the person you quoted was trying to say? Lets say the group has two wizards. One focused on improved spell penetration while the other focused on crafting. They both show up to the first session. The first wizard's spells can affect a better range of targets then the second one. The second wizard has better AC and saves from his extra gear. Both are balanced against each other. You are saying the second wizard should be FORCED to work as a slave without compensation to the first wizard so that his AC and saves can be improved as well? NOW there is an imbalance. NOW the first wizard is clearly superior.
Make a profit? Huh? One character is trading something to another at a discounted rate. An exchange of goods profits BOTH parties. In this case the wizard is being Extra nice by offering a discount.
Here is your problem. That sword is worth 2000 gold. If you have two fighters who want a +1 sword. You found one such sword and a big pile of coins. In your case the fighter who gets the sword for 1000 gold out of the loot pile is robbing the other fighter, who now has to go into town and buy his for 2000 gold. You are giving that first fighter 1000 gold extra loot over the rest of the party by using this system. If there was a +1 sword and 4000 gold loot between the two and you divided it your way one fighter gets a +1 sword and 1500 gold, the other gets 2500 gold. But since he has to buy his sword he ends up with a +1 sword and 500 gold. The only fair way to divide it is to apply the FULL 2000 gold value to that sword, then BOTH end up with a +1 sword and 1000 gold.
It can create problems. Some players are extremely threatened by others getting anything more then they get. If you have a mature group it shouldn't be an issue. If you don't have a mature group then expect all manner of abuse from all sides of the table. But then if you have an immature group you probably have more issues than this one at your table.
Wow... arminas clearly favors evil aligned parties. And that is one foolish barbarian. He is unsatisfied because he is getting a discount on magic items, so he destroys any chance he would ever get a discount again? In fact it is also possible the barbarian now has to rely on whatever cut of loot randomly drops from now on while the rest of the party has custom made and discounted gear... yeah not very bright of the barbarian. I can see an evil rogue acting in such a fashion as to turn people against each other for personal profit, but really that barbarian needs to buy a clue.
Well arminas does support an evil play style. This wizard fits right in with the rogue and barbarian.
What an odd viewpoint. If I have a friend who owns a Pizza place. And I get discounts on pizza there. I certainly don't expect it to be my right to have pizza AT COST. In fact I would see it as nice that my friend offers me discounts on all my pizza purchases. I would probably go out of my way in return to recommend that pizza to others. Look at it this way this is an outside benefit not a part of adventuring. It would be the same as if you demanded the fighter guard your home day and night while not adventuring. I am fairly sure he would be offended. Crafting lets the user be better equipped than standard in exchange for some number of feats and skills. So the real issue is why are you getting angry when this person offers to share this benefit with you in exchange for extra gold from adventuring. You wouldn't be concerned at all if the person just made items for himself and didn't try to "profit" off them from the group. Yet by sharing this with the group he is actually elevating everyone's level of gear. You are GAINING from this. And you are upset because he is also gaining by the transaction?! PS- Jo Bird: It has always been my view that wealth by level is NOT taken to mean half price on magic items. If I started a character at a higher level I would pay full price from my starting funds for magic items. Those funds are set by wealth by level. So effectively item creation feats can up to double the effective wealth of the character taking them (at the cost of feats and skills), since he effectively pays half price for any items he can build himself. This means there is already an imbalance in the value of the gear of the characters. The transaction doesn't create an imbalance, It simply sells some of that imbalance back to the others in exchange for money.
He isn't less effective... he is likely better equipped than the wizard who bought spell penetration feats instead. It is a trade off. He is charging the party for his time and effort to make them Better equipped as well.
Um... no. His feats make him better equipped. This is what he brings to the party as part of the team. And what concern is it of yours anyway whether he is optimized the way YOU want him to be?! He wanted to play someone who tinkers around the shop. It is HIS character not yours... are you also screaming at the poor player who bought skill focus in a profession skill that he isn't pulling his full weight in the party?
Wow that is one arrogant barbarian. But then since his party plays evil anyway, I wouldn't expect anything better from the barbarian. The barbarian is now willing to throw away teamwork because the wizard wouldn't work as his slave for months on end... wow. Well that cuts both ways... I would be willing to guess that the wizard doesn't blast any creatures that are attacking the barbarian either. I can't imagine this play group gets very far in adventures. Heck the cleric probably only heals his own wounds too... I am glad I don't have to play in this group.
It is item creation that creates the imbalance NOT selling the items for whatever value the players come up with. If you want perfectly balanced wealth by level then you need to ban all crafting and profession skills. In fact you will probably have to enforce an even treasure division rule as well, since it is actually quite rare in my experience to find a perfectly even treasure division system. And just about every group I have played in does this differently. -=-Um... I find it odd that you only apply half the value of magical items in the treasure? When a sword is worth 2000 gold then that is what it is worth... if the characters don't need it and sell it for 50% they are undercutting their wealth by level by 1000 gold divided by the number of players. -=- Whoa... All feats are certainly NOT created equal. This is the foundation for countless builds filling countless web documents. It has effective been proven true by raw weight of evidence. You can't assume all feats are equal, they are not equal.
Thank You. This is someone who sees the big picture. This is exactly what is happening. The creation feat is generating wealth.
I use an iPad, it lasts a long time and handles rule books in full color flawlessly. If the iPad2 is too pricey try looking for an iPad 1 on ebay or someplace like that. You may be able to get a good discount.
They had Ki Straps in 3.0. I am sure you could enchant those with an enhancement bonus or other weapon enchantments. Or you could borrow the monk gloves from Neverwinter Nights. They had an enhancement bonus and often an elemental damage boost.
Hmmm... not sure which is more powerful. But I have played a couple Gestalt games. I played a Monk/Fighter in one and everyone seemed to agree that it was crazy powerful. In the other one I played a Warlock/Rogue. But since I never got into any fights in the second game I am not sure how it would stack up in comparison.
PS: I would second the part about asking an optimizer for help. They can find rule needles in the haystack of rule books. They can take your neat character and tell you that by swapping out three feats and adding a special build option you can double your PC's effectiveness. I do this when I am playing next to optimizers and power gamers. It helps keep me from falling way behind in the sort of challenges the GM is going to have to toss at us.
Wow I am a little late to this... 78 posts. When I make a character I start with an idea. Anything can give me the idea. Reading boooks, comics, and magazines Or watching TV, anime, or movies are great sources of fictional concepts. But I can also often be inspired by a stereotype (or the breaking of one), a new game mechanic, or especially a game setting. Game settings are filled with cool character ideas that are often easy to build in the game they were intended for. After that I answer the question: How does this character fight? This basically tells me what class or classes the character should be. It gives me an idea about what feats I should be taking and which stats should be prioritized. And it lets me know if the idea and battle style mesh with the mechanics of the game. After that brief glance at mechanics, I go back and build this character's background. I think about where she grew up, the people she would be exposed to, and likely events she would have been part of. I start writing about not just the events but about how she would have felt about those events. Off of that background I detail her personality, motivation, and assign an alignment. I then look at where I want her to be in 20 levels of play. Is she a good fit concept wise for a PrC or perhaps some other feat chain that requires me to plan for it from early in life. Any of these I find I make note of and list the level she needs to buy them at. Any left over feat slots or choices can be left to either better reinforce the idea of the character, her background, or wait to be filled as the story unfolds. Now I have a fully fleshed out character with a personality, background, motivation, and role. I know what path I want her career to take and how she handles difficulties. Now it's time to fill out the mechanical side completely. Roll HP and fill in all that mechanical stuff that the game seems to need.
Please don't. You are going to give one character cool powers in exchange for an evil act the demon could just as easily have done itself especially if it has SO much power it can grant powers (an evil demon god perhaps). Aside from the fact that the other players are going to be upset, this has the hallmark of a poor decision all over it. Why? Because it makes no sense. It will make your games difficult to balance if one PC suddenly has powers. And even if you structure it such that it is fair and makes sense your other players will always think you are simply showering free powers on someone for whatever out of game reasons. So in summary... you want to shower one PC with gifts so that it can become more difficult to balance encounters and leave resentment toward you from the others. Last GM I have seen use this type of thing ruined his game. It ended badly in PvP one session later. And lost the trust of ALL his players. Yes even the one receiving the gifts had serious reservations about letting him GM again after that.
My way is 25% XP for surviving a lost fight.
This is why I like TOZ's posts. No nonsense, straight to the point.
You could also use Hubris points on rolled characters that are better than the rest of the pack. Not a bad solution to those rare uber characters.
When I write an adventure... those points don't come up till I am putting the final polish on the adventure. -I start with a general story.
- Separate the world from the play area.
It's pretty off topic to be discussing Seduction or even fornication at this point. The OP has made up her mind about it. I wish I could help with the build part... but I am fairly clueless about builds. I just make what seems to fit the character at the time.
Yeah the Dragon Armor is just literary license, not an alignment issue.
If that's true, why is the fighter iconic Neutral Good? Probably because the writer of that iconic doesn't agree with me. Besides even if a neutral good character could walk a fine line and get away with it. A Paladin has to be an exemplar of both Law and Good.
Ok you convinced me on the second point but not the first one. Whether you are up front or not many people expect a certain bond when engaged intimately. To later find out they don't have one hurts. Larry has a good point too. You are going to be a social magnet. Many girls will not have the option of saying no. Is it absolutely vital to you to leave the fornication in the character? It could be removed without damaging the concept or personality. You could even leave in the flirty side... she just wouldn't head home with anyone afterward.
Edgy... yes. I have two issues with the personality. The first is the big one. Fornication hurts people. You can't run around building and breaking relationships with various people without deliberately causing a lot of emotional harm. It is an extremely selfish behavior. This isn't something a good character would do. The second one is less of an issue and more of a concern. It is theoretically possible to be witty, edgy, vulgar, ect. without actually being evil... but it may be hard to avoid tossing insults while being witty. Or difficult to avoid socially destroying some innocent who isn't as trendy but wants to be part of the 'In' crowd. Both seem rather un-paladin like. Not enough to fall on it's own here but definitely an area you are likely to need to be careful about. Love the character though. Not a paladin with that first point in my opinion. But a cool concept regardless. The purple sash? Is that a reference to the trendy purple sashes worn by young trendy and single nobles in Cormyr? I had a ranger who wore one all the time from that setting.
Maybe your group plays differently than mine. My players love playing unusual characters... If someone had an 18 and little else in our group he would probably play a SAD character like a wizard. In that case I certainly wouldn't expect him to take point literally. But since his spells will be extra potent the group may well look to him to take battlefield control spells which give the whole group an edge in any encounters. It's all about teamwork. Now if someone generated a top heavy character with multiple high stats then they would probably tackle a MAD type character like a monk for one example. At least at my table. It would be seen as an opportunity to build something more difficult stat wise.
I am not sure how to take that pat on the back? Condescension or friendly poke?Take it the same way this one was meant to be taken. ~hugs~ I was giving you a friendly poke... I thought you knew that.
I am not sure how to take that pat on the back? Condescension or friendly poke? Yes it sounded like a brag but it was intended to explain my skill level as a GM... highly skilled at low level, not skilled but able to manage high level, and of course useless at epic level. My statement that "it doesn't work" is accurate. I acknowledge that there are people who can make it work for them but for the most part if someone sold you a car that required constant daily maintenance to keep it running and even when it was running required careful attention to the controls or it would crash, I would say they sold me a broken car. You may be skilled at keeping that car going with a lot of work. But for the rest of us it doesn't work. Can you see where I was coming from now?
? I am sure slimy tentacled monsters find other slimy tentacled monsters very attractive or there wouldn't be so darn many for PCs to kill.Race and opportunity are the important factors in mating rituals. Just cause a dwarf is hot doesn't mean humans want them. Charisma can be appearance... Don't limit your players imaginations by excluding one of the many possible facets of Charisma.
~pats TOZ on the back~
Otherwise, it'e either a cake walk or sudden, absolute death. Neither of which is fun.I have played in and run games in the epic level in 3.5e, and this is exactly what happens. It is exactly why epic level play doesn't work. I am a good GM. Better than most if you believe my players. My low level games are edge of your seat fun. I struggled a little in high level play and I made some mistakes but my game was still quite enjoyable. But if epic play can blindside me so utterly than maybe they need more work on presenting the fundamentals of play in a high level game of any level before tackling a product that only a few GMs seem to be able to manage. I mean think about it, there are a lot of GMs who need help with upper level play. If you get them that help first, then the usefulness of a set of optional epic play rules suddenly becomes useful to a large segment of your GMs not just a few.
Maybe that sounds good... but one step at a time is better. Build up the pre-epic play as a solid ground work. Then later you can put together an Option book for epic level where there is no standard rule, but rather a collection of optional rules a GM can use some or none of. And then they get to sell two books rather than one. And we get fully focused rule books rather than something watered down by the need to put too much into one volume.
This is true now that you bring it up... Groups I have played in that roll tend to have one session devoted to building characters as a party. Groups that I have played in that point buy tend to build their characters separately and come prepped with a complete build ready to go. This might be part of the reason I like rolling. That back story you create as a team as you roll up the characters and decide on roles and concepts. One of the other reasons I don't like point buy is how cheaply 18s are handed out for the price of a 7 or two. The way I roll those 18s are special and rare. They mean something. It is understood that the person who rolled well above the crowd will be taking point and putting himself in the most danger. And the guy who rolled well behind the rest of the crowd is often given a reroll. Now you have a team of people most of whom are right about the same capability as each other. There is that one guy who stands out from time to time. But in our group he shoulders more attacks than the rest and runs a higher risk to go with his higher capability.
You DO have the option as it stands. There are already at least two epic level systems for 3.x e. Feel free to use them as you desire. What you don't have is what you really want... official support from Pathfinder for your epic play. And official support means it will affect nearly every Pathfinder game in play. That is why they shouldn't even be considering such a product until they have provided strong support for upper level play first.
I have played in and run games in the epic level in 3.5e, and this is exactly what happens. It is exactly why epic level play doesn't work. And it is exactly why I call the epic rules the third nail in the coffin of 3.5e. I would prefer Pathfinder NOT put any nails into it's own coffin. Long Live Pathfinder! We don't need epic rules. Please. What we DO need is a comprehensive set of rules and guidelines for higher level play. When we have a product that lays out a solid framework for the teens to 20th level range. One which includes concrete guidelines for handling the kind of crazy tricks a high level team can use. THAT would be a wildly successful product.
I let my players define their high or low charisma score. If they want it to include beauty than it does... if they don't it doesn't. It doesn't hurt the game any and can actually get your players more involved in their characters. I would say that is a good thing. Besides a high charisma Hag may not be attractive to humans... but she is probably looking very good to other Hags.
I like assigning scores in order... ~sigh~ Even if no one else does. As for your set array, well no one can say it isn't fair. I would be willing to try it once and see how it worked. My only concern would be the cookie cutter feel of it. But for one game, why not? I mean my power gamer friend made me play with an array containing an 18 and two 16s once. But he was GMing so he made the rules. Man he made his enemies tough as well... it felt like an epic battle every time we encountered anything.
ROFL Although I did randomly select a race and class once... it was very fun... just not very effective in combat.
I think you can see what I am trying to point out, right? It's that you can't take a power gamed set from one side and compare it to a normal set on the other side. I am going to have to disagree with you on what most people are using. What we see here on the thread is a vocal minority. NOT a useful sampling by any stretch. I am basing what people use most on personal experience, which while it is biased is certainly a better sampling than web warriors on a hot topic thread.
~Claps~ I am sure I could argue with you about walking out... but why bother. You hit the nail on the head. If someone runs around screaming munchkin... they probably are one.
Do you see what you are doing? Well I omitted that intentionally. But I was just pulling a random example. I guess I could have used the 30+ pb or 56 pb others have brought up. But I have found I am beginning to like poking TOZ (in a friendly manner) from time to time. I think you can see what I am trying to point out, right? It's that you can't take a power gamed set from one side and compare it to a normal set on the other side. It completely invalidates any point you needed to make. {That and I needed to rescue the other two from the logic trap you artfully walked them into}.
Do you see what you are doing? Most rolled methods use 4d6 drop low arranged as desired. You are comparing a method used by those few who support high powered play on the rolled side vs most point buys. If you wanted a more even comparison you would have to use TOZ's 42 point buy as one example. The most fun I had with point buy was a 10pt PF campaign. But that was mostly because it was a role play heavy game. The epic fight was a single wolf that wandered too close to the village. Most of the time we talked in character with each other. The game never really went past 6th level yet it lasted for a year. This would be similar to straight 3d6 perhaps in power level. But for the most part I stand by my position that 3e's Organic Method was the best. As it was the funnest to use and the hardest to abuse.
|