XP-Cost Removal


Combat & Magic

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

My player's generally do not like the idea of paying with XP for creating magical items or casting powerful spells. It is a riduculous rule. Why would someone "loose" experience by doing such things...If you would simulate a "personal sacrifice" as stated in the rules, there would more "realistic" ways...So here is my proposal:

XP-COSTS
Instead of paying XP for using item creation feats or casting a spell with XP-components, the character pays 5 gp per XP he normally has to spend.

this rule is derived from the fact, that if you buy a spellcaster's service, you pay 5 gp per XP.

Dark Archive

Or what about temporary ability score loss. It will come back with time, but it drains you for awhile to make those magic items.

It is better than going back to the city from the dungeon and taking a week and a few xp to make the magic item that you need for the dungeon. One week later back to the dungeon. Some magic items it takes less than that. This way you are physically punished for the effort it takes to make the item instead of xp punishment.

Before you say, well they will just heal those temporary ability score losses when they are done making the item. Maybe the loss has to heal naturally though. Losing ability scores by making magic items can not be healed by magic.


IMO the experience point rule is included to prevent crafting abuse in the game at 4% of market cost.

Suggested wealth by level is 49,000 gp at L10 so lets round it to 50,000.

If all PC wealth (doubtful and not a given in most games IMO) was used for crafting permanent items for himself say with Craft Wondrous Item that is 100,000 gp market or -4,000 experience points to the PC.

Of course there are the other party members to consider so there is a multiplier effect except the rules do allow the other party member to contribute the experience points instead of the caster.

Normally this will be prorated over quite a few levels 3rd to 7th. In most non perfect experience advancement games the PC should be comparable to other party members. (There is also the case for the crafter lagging the party by a level gaining more experience than other party members)

Normally the PC crafts usable magic items with some function to cost that provided more benefit than random treasure. They are not "normally" enchanting bogus +3 backs cratchers they are crafting items that will make them more effective in game.

So now not only are the PCs more effective than standard PCs they are better equipped. If the PCs were treated as encounters their CR would probably be increased +1 but as PCs they are not penalized for being more effective.

Scarab Sages

I had been working on something for exactly this, and posted this in the Casting Beyond Daily Limits thread just for the sake of comparison.

Dark Archive

Coming from old RuneQuest, I like the idea of giving up ability points instead of xp. Note that the points spent on mgic items or spells should be lost forever (that is, no "damage", no "drain", just lose them).

That way, it maintains the notion of personal sacrifice and "leaving part of your soul in it", but it's much easier to keep track of it. calculating a lost level is always a pain in the ass.


Betote wrote:

Coming from old RuneQuest, I like the idea of giving up ability points instead of xp. Note that the points spent on mgic items or spells should be lost forever (that is, no "damage", no "drain", just lose them).

That way, it maintains the notion of personal sacrifice and "leaving part of your soul in it", but it's much easier to keep track of it. calculating a lost level is always a pain in the ass.

That's horrible factoring in potions and scrolls.


Beastman wrote:

My player's generally do not like the idea of paying with XP for creating magical items or casting powerful spells. It is a riduculous rule. Why would someone "loose" experience by doing such things...If you would simulate a "personal sacrifice" as stated in the rules, there would more "realistic" ways...So here is my proposal:

XP-COSTS
Instead of paying XP for using item creation feats or casting a spell with XP-components, the character pays 5 gp per XP he normally has to spend.

this rule is derived from the fact, that if you buy a spellcaster's service, you pay 5 gp per XP.

Uhm, no offense, but, are you crazy? Without the XP xost there, making those with the crafting feats consider the cost, crafting would be crazy. The only alternative would be to require obscure and hard to find materials for EVRY magic item to be created, and then your campaign degenerates into a quest to get the mats for the Staff of power rather than your original idea. You NEED the XP cost to keep the munchkinism of crafting under control.

Liberty's Edge

Betote wrote:

Coming from old RuneQuest, I like the idea of giving up ability points instead of xp. Note that the points spent on mgic items or spells should be lost forever (that is, no "damage", no "drain", just lose them).

That way, it maintains the notion of personal sacrifice and "leaving part of your soul in it", but it's much easier to keep track of it. calculating a lost level is always a pain in the ass.

News Bulletin:

In the world of D&D, there is now a terrible shortage of magic items, as wizards everywhere protest the new sacrifices they're asked to make in creating magic items.

"You know, when it cost XP's, it was rough, but every once in a while I might make something handy. But now that I'm going to have to lose stat points? Forget it, I ain't making s*** anymore." said one disgruntled caster.

Sovereign Court

Plognark wrote:
Betote wrote:

Coming from old RuneQuest, I like the idea of giving up ability points instead of xp. Note that the points spent on mgic items or spells should be lost forever (that is, no "damage", no "drain", just lose them).

That way, it maintains the notion of personal sacrifice and "leaving part of your soul in it", but it's much easier to keep track of it. calculating a lost level is always a pain in the ass.

News Bulletin:

In the world of D&D, there is now a terrible shortage of magic items, as wizards everywhere protest the new sacrifices they're asked to make in creating magic items.

"You know, when it cost XP's, it was rough, but every once in a while I might make something handy. But now that I'm going to have to lose stat points? Forget it, I ain't making s*** anymore." said one disgruntled caster.

We have never used xp costs in our games and have no munchkin problems, but we are all 30+ and can avoid that (usally).

You can rule that crafting and casting cannot lower your level and if it would that try would fail until you gain more xp
or
You can also keep track of ex costs without subtracting them and when they reach a level that would drop the character a level he/she cannot make more until they advance

Sovereign Court

What about the following:

1. XP Cost paid by the caster when crafting items to sell outside the party.

2. XP Cost paid by the beneficiary if the item is made for a party member.

This way, the caster can't get rich by crafting high level items at will without paying the "XP Penalty" and yet, the caster is penalized by helping out his party. Its a fairly balanced system, requires little to make it backwards compatible, and everyone is happy....sort of...

Of course, all this could be handled by a good DM (which I'm not always capable of). :)

Liberty's Edge

Cylerist wrote:

We have never used xp costs in our games and have no munchkin problems, but we are all 30+ and can avoid that (usally).
You can rule that crafting and casting cannot lower your level and if it would that try would fail until you gain more xp
or
You can also keep track of ex costs without subtracting them and when they reach a level that would drop the character a level he/she cannot make more until they advance

I've got a house rule that pretty much does the same thing.

We keep fairly close track of time passing though, so I've yet to have any abuses either.


Keryth wrote:
Uhm, no offense, but, are you crazy? Without the XP xost there, making those with the crafting feats consider the cost, crafting would be crazy. The only alternative would be to require obscure and hard to find materials for EVRY magic item to be created, and then your campaign degenerates into a quest to get the mats for the Staff of power rather than your original idea. You NEED the XP cost to keep the munchkinism of crafting under control.

How many magic items do characters create?

Yeah no offense taken ;-) In my 20+ years of gaming, there there perhaps only two hands full of items created (with the exception of scrolls; so perhaps xp-cost for minor magic items should stay.). Most characters don't have the time anyway to do such things - they are supposed to go on adventures and not to live boring lives in lab...

Liberty's Edge

The problem with having an xp cost for making magic items is that it lowers the level of the crafter. Combined with half cost for the items, it means he is going to be even further ahead of the default gp/level in the DMG.

Removing it means they are just getting items for half price, as well as more conveniently.

If the xp cost were removed, would it be reasonable to have the items cost the full amount?

If so, is "charging" a feat for the convenience of making magic items as needed (albeit with the time delay) reasonably balanced?

If not, then what other system could substitute for allowing players to create magic items?

Or, should item creation simply be taken off the table for players?
If it is, what should replace the scribe scroll feat for wizards at 1st level?


Samuel Weiss wrote:
level loss

There was mention of an XP-Dept system somewhere in a post...

Liberty's Edge

Beastman wrote:
Samuel Weiss wrote:
level loss
There was mention of an XP-Dept system somewhere in a post...

I do not mean actual lose of a level, I mean functional loss of a level because you have spent xp and so do not gain a level when everyone else in the group does.

The same effect would occur with xp-debt, or with xp costs shared by the person gaining the item. Any way it sorts out, charging xp for magic items inevitably benefits the crafter in respect to the gp/level guidelines in the DMG.


There are two factors to consider in making magic items - cost and XP.

In the current system, one spends gold to *someone* and then an XP cost. At the highest levels, gold is irrelevant.

But in the rules, it's never explained who, or what the gold buys.

IMC, the gold has to go towards specific components - beholder eyes, dragon teeth, zombie fingernails - whatever. That stuff isn't easy to come by - especially stuff from rare or powerful monsters.

What I hate seeing is when the player merely scratches of 10,000gp from his character sheet, deducts some XP and now has a fancy new item.

No thanks. To do it right, you need to require specific components. Do that, and the XP "burden" becomes necessary. And you have a more legitimate, realistic limiting factor in place.


I've always felt the current xp-loss crafting system to be a penalty to a player, when in my opinion it should be more of a self-sacrifice. I feel such sacrifice needs to impact game play, possibly for a lengthy period of time, but should not be permanent. I've played around with a few ideas to change this, and while I haven't found anything I like totally quite yet, some of them hold promise. Others I've tossed to the wayside.

I've always liked the idea of specific components for crafted items, but agree that the game can turn into nothing more than a glorified hunt as a result. Not that such games can't be enjoyable at times. Maybe have a few specific items that hold significance, and are somewhat pricey, but are readily available. For example, in Pathfinder I've thought about playing off the spell schools even further, by having a specific gemstone tied to each one.

Perhaps, when a caster creates an item, they lose the ability to cast the spell(s) used in that item's creation for some period of time. This isn't so difficult to accept with unlimited, or even charged, items, but can represent a significant sacrifice in certain situations. An alternate to this, but using the same concept, would be the loss of a spell slot of a specific level. The question becomes one of when does the caster become able to cast the spell(s) again. You could place it on a next-level-gained basis, but how does this explain NPC casters that make a living crafting magical items, rather than adventuring. It could be on a so-many-days/weeks/months basis, but that can get sticky when it comes to keeping track of numbers.


Heaven's Agent wrote:

I've always felt the current xp-loss crafting system to be a penalty to a player, when in my opinion it should be more of a self-sacrifice. I feel such sacrifice needs to impact game play, possibly for a lengthy period of time, but should not be permanent. I've played around with a few ideas to change this, and while I haven't found anything I like totally quite yet, some of them hold promise. Others I've tossed to the wayside.

I've always liked the idea of specific components for crafted items, but agree that the game can turn into nothing more than a glorified hunt as a result. Not that such games can't be enjoyable at times. Maybe have a few specific items that hold significance, and are somewhat pricey, but are readily available. For example, in Pathfinder I've thought about playing off the spell schools even further, by having a specific gemstone tied to each one.

Perhaps, when a caster creates an item, they lose the ability to cast the spell(s) used in that item's creation for some period of time. This isn't so difficult to accept with unlimited, or even charged, items, but can represent a significant sacrifice in certain situations. An alternate to this, but using the same concept, would be the loss of a spell slot of a specific level. The question becomes one of when does the caster become able to cast the spell(s) again. You could place it on a next-level-gained basis, but how does this explain NPC casters that make a living crafting magical items, rather than adventuring. It could be on a so-many-days/weeks/months basis, but that can get sticky when it comes to keeping track of numbers.

I suppose you could have the spells lost, #of days= xp cost/100. With a minimum of one day. It might slow potion/scroll production a little, But i think it might work

Although, I like you train of thought.


XP Cost might be working in a point-buy-system but not in a level system.
It just makes no sense speaking in terms of game mechanics.

I think temporary ability drain and negative levels are the way to go.
But perhabs make them more durable one way or the other.

I think of temporary constitution or wisdom damage.
Perhaps 1 Point per 1000 GM and the more damage you took the longer they take to heal.

I am thinking of a mighty wizard producing a powerful magic artifact and having to fall into a coma for a year or something.
That's the "fluff" the rules should represent somehow...

At least this would be cool... :|

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Card Game, Rulebook Subscriber
Heaven's Agent wrote:

Perhaps, when a caster creates an item, they lose the ability to cast the spell(s) used in that item's creation for some period of time.

I like that.

And 1 day per 100 gp is workable, or it could just vary based on the item created.

Scrolls = 1 day
Potions = 1 day
Wands = 1 week, etc.


Wicht wrote:
Heaven's Agent wrote:

Perhaps, when a caster creates an item, they lose the ability to cast the spell(s) used in that item's creation for some period of time.

I like that.

And 1 day per 100 gp is workable, or it could just vary based on the item created.

Scrolls = 1 day
Potions = 1 day
Wands = 1 week, etc.

So, either there is a lot of downtime in your games, or your wizards won't be crafting anything.

If the changes to the Wizard class are to allow Wizards the ability to do something useful every rnd of an encounter... why add rules that makes them completely useless for days/weeks?

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Card Game, Rulebook Subscriber
Doug Bragg 172 wrote:


So, either there is a lot of downtime in your games, or your wizards won't be crafting anything.

If the changes to the Wizard class are to allow Wizards the ability to do something useful every rnd of an encounter... why add rules that makes them completely useless for days/weeks?

A wizard creates a wand of fireball and subsequently can't cast fireballs without the wand for a week. I don't see how that makes them useless.

Or he makes a Sword of Shocking and can't cast lightning bolts for three weeks and is forced to use fireballs the whole time. Not useless but there is an in game effect.


Ah... I misunderstood. I thought it was a loss of all casting ability.

But if you only lose the ability to cast the spell... why bother with the restriction at all? Most of the time it'll be a minor issue - if it's noticeable at all. On the rare occasion where the spell is critical (such as needing 4 castings of fly, but only being able to cast it 2/day), you end up delaying the entire party an additional 2 days.

I guess I'm just not seeing the point of this rule... if it's just to be able to say "See, there's a cost to crafting!" eh... why bother.


Doug Bragg wrote:

Ah... I misunderstood. I thought it was a loss of all casting ability.

But if you only lose the ability to cast the spell... why bother with the restriction at all? Most of the time it'll be a minor issue - if it's noticeable at all. On the rare occasion where the spell is critical (such as needing 4 castings of fly, but only being able to cast it 2/day), you end up delaying the entire party an additional 2 days.

I guess I'm just not seeing the point of this rule... if it's just to be able to say "See, there's a cost to crafting!" eh... why bother.

Hehe, obviously they need some work, but they're ideas; I never claimed they were polished. ;D

You make a good point about the frivolity of the idea at times, though I don't think it would ever end up delaying the party. If anything, gamers are resourceful; another alternative to flight is likely to be utilized. After all, there was a time when a now high-level party didn't have access to spells such as fly. I'm assuming they did alright without it, since they survived long enough to gain access to the spell.


The Artificer's Handbook (by Mystic Eye Games) has such a system. It's not *simple*, but it's a fine replacement for the existing system (which sucks, IMHO).

In that system, an item requires a number of spell slots based on a precise formula which includes the number of spell slots required and results in a gp cost (item creation cost).

The formula is this:
10gp(spell level + caster level -1) * # of spell slots required, squared.

Or,
10gp(SL + CL -1) * SS^2

There are a number of charts, based on the kind of item you're creating to give you the number of spell slots required. A higher caster level, spell level, or a lot of spell slots required yields a higher cost.

The number of "spell slots required" is just that - you have to devote that many spell slots of whatever level of spell you're trying to create to the process for the duration of the casting time. Which means they are unavailable during that time.

There are also rules to allow multiple spells to be placed into a single item. Like, if you wanted to create boots of flying which granted haste 3/day. That's super easy to calculate with those rules.

The Artificer's Handbook is 100% OGC.

If Jason wants a copy of it, all he has to do is ask. I wrote it. I'll gladly give him a copy of it for him to peruse at his leisure.


die_kluge wrote:
There are two factors to consider in making magic items - cost and XP.

Incorrect. There are FOUR factors: money, XP, time, and knowledge.

Any of the other three could be expanded to fill the gap left by removing XP costs. For money, you could do something as simple as changing the cost or something as complex as requiring special materials to craft (although the latter gives problems with backwards compatibility). For time, you can simply increase the time factor from 1 day/1,000g higher - 1/500 or even 1/100, for example. For knowledge, you could require additional skill checks (Craft: Magic Item? Spellcraft + Knowledge: Arcana/Religion/Nature?), require special ceremonies that need to be researched, etc.

XP shouldn't be a currency. It doesn't make sense as a currency. People say it's your life force - but isn't that one of the things Constitution measures? And if it's life force, what happens to a wizard that spends himself to 0 XP by crafting? Shouldn't he die because he has no life force left?


Zurai wrote:
die_kluge wrote:
There are two factors to consider in making magic items - cost and XP.
XP shouldn't be a currency. It doesn't make sense as a currency. People say it's your life force - but isn't that one of the things Constitution measures? And if it's life force, what happens to a wizard that spends himself to 0 XP by crafting? Shouldn't he die because he has no life force left?

You're preaching to the choir on this one. I don't even use XP in my campaign. It doesn't exist.


Keryth wrote:
Uhm, no offense, but, are you crazy?

I'm glad this wasn't intended to be offensive. :)

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

It is my current plan to remove XP costs from the game entirely. This means that there are some aspects, such as magic item creation, that will need some rebalancing. XP is not a commodity that should be spent. It makes little "in game" sense, and forces some characters to spend their advancement just to use some of their class abilities.

Just an FYI.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

It is my current plan to remove XP costs from the game entirely. This means that there are some aspects, such as magic item creation, that will need some rebalancing. XP is not a commodity that should be spent. It makes little "in game" sense, and forces some characters to spend their advancement just to use some of their class abilities.

Just an FYI.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

I'm with you, somewhat. I hate level loss and XP reduction, but I think converting it to an "XP debt" system would work out nicely. You still are paying a cost, but it doesn't hit your character's current build (so you don't have to scratch traits off the character sheet).


NSTR wrote:
Or what about temporary ability score loss. It will come back with time, but it drains you for awhile to make those magic items.

There is precedent for this kind of ability score loss in the backlash of the contact other plane spell, I think. Perhaps those mechanics would be applicable?


die_kluge wrote:
You're preaching to the choir on this one. I don't even use XP in my campaign. It doesn't exist.

Same here. The characters level up at story-appropriate points, not based on the amount of slaughter they perform. In fact, it encourages clever play, because the players realize that if they can get into the evil keep, save the prisoner, and get back out without fighting anyone, they get just as much advancement as if they kicked down the door and killed everyone inside.

Thanks,

Ron


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

It is my current plan to remove XP costs from the game entirely. This means that there are some aspects, such as magic item creation, that will need some rebalancing. XP is not a commodity that should be spent. It makes little "in game" sense, and forces some characters to spend their advancement just to use some of their class abilities.

Just an FYI.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

You have no idea how happy you've just made me. :)

BTW, my offer still stands. If you want a copy of Artificer's handbook, just email me.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8

die_kluge wrote:
BTW, my offer still stands. If you want a copy of Artificer's handbook, just email me.

Take him up on the offer -- the Artifcer's Handbook is one of my most used third-party books.

Even if you didn't use his system, just moving toward function-oriented item creation feats (which Monte Cook also did in Arcana Unearthed) is a huge evolutionary step forward.

Dark Archive

WelbyBumpus wrote:


Same here. The characters level up at story-appropriate points, not based on the amount of slaughter they perform. In fact, it encourages clever play, because the players realize that if they can get into the evil keep, save the prisoner, and get back out without fighting anyone, they get just as much advancement as if they kicked down the door and killed everyone inside.

Thanks,

Ron

Off topic, but by RAW this should happen too. If they get in, and out, without killing anything, they should get the XP of all the encounters they successfully bypassed. I would be tempted to give them a bonus too for pulling off the stunt.

Liberty's Edge

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

It is my current plan to remove XP costs from the game entirely. This means that there are some aspects, such as magic item creation, that will need some rebalancing. XP is not a commodity that should be spent. It makes little "in game" sense, and forces some characters to spend their advancement just to use some of their class abilities.

Just an FYI.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

You guys rock, in a totally awesome nerdy kind of way. ^_^

Liberty's Edge

I'd like to second to the 5th power removing the XP costs from the game where possible. Besides the removal from class abilities, if there is an easier way to handle the XP cost of dying and the XP cost of negative levels, I'm all for it.

For me as a DM, life is easy when everyone stays more-or-less the same level.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

It is my current plan to remove XP costs from the game entirely. This means that there are some aspects, such as magic item creation, that will need some rebalancing. XP is not a commodity that should be spent. It makes little "in game" sense, and forces some characters to spend their advancement just to use some of their class abilities.

Just an FYI.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Just a thought, but hit them where they live :) Make it cost hit points. Variable amounts maybe... enable human sacrifice for the bad guys. Limit or eliminate the ability to heal this damage magically... The creation of some items might be beyond low level characters due to HP costs. Artifacts might require sacrifices -- literally. Would take some careful thought and a lot of work to implement. Might be fun though.


D'oh I just read this and stupidly posted another thread.

Idea was make an ability check with loss of spell slots while the item existed as means of punishment.

UPDATE - No idea if this is a posting faux pas to cross post the same text and not have a link (apologies rendered if so) but this seems to be where the discussion is happening. Edited/tweaked post as follows;

I really hate the exp costs for magic items thing. I know it's a game balance mechanism designed to punish PCs for making cool stuff but you'd think making magic items would actually, I don't know, make you more experienced.

Here's an idea.

Making an item means a potential loss of a spell slot. The character has to make a Primary stat check (DC 10 if 1k to 5k, 12 if 5001 to 10k, 15 if 10,001 to 20k, DC 20 if 20,0001 to 50k, DC 25 if 50,001 to 100k, and DC 30 if 100,000k+)

Success = no loss
Failure by 1-5 = loss of low spell slot
Failure by 6-9 = loss of medium spell slot
Failure by 10+ = loss of high spell slot

Low = Bottom third, Medium = Middle spells, High = top spells

Eg if 5th level Wiz Low = 0-1, Medium = 2, High = 3

The slot remains lost until that item is consumed or rendered unmagic. A spellcaster can suck magic out of existing items through a reverse ritual that can restore the magic.

The flip side is of course magic items will be more expensive since spellcasters potentially lose power for crafting things - but then even useless magic becomes useful as the spellcaster can suck the magic out of them like they were a vampiric Jimmy Stewart.


R_Chance wrote:
Just a thought, but hit them where they live :) Make it cost hit points. Variable amounts maybe... enable human sacrifice for the bad guys. Limit or eliminate the ability to heal this damage magically... The creation of some items might be beyond low level characters due to HP costs. Artifacts might require sacrifices -- literally. Would take some careful thought and a lot of work to implement. Might be fun though.

I think that's probably worse than an XP cost; the traditional magic item crafters are wizards, and their hit points are already a scarcity; I think there would end up being even fewer items crafted than now. And if you allow evil characters to sacrifice others for item creation you'll face balance issues, and the fact that now some characters can't utilize any of the magic equipment obtained from a villain, due to moral incompatibilities.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

It is my current plan to remove XP costs from the game entirely. This means that there are some aspects, such as magic item creation, that will need some rebalancing. XP is not a commodity that should be spent. It makes little "in game" sense, and forces some characters to spend their advancement just to use some of their class abilities.

Just an FYI.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Curious how this will address the issue in game. If there is no effective cost in game it will be abused. (Not saying it will be abused in all games just that the potential will there and it will quickly be identified as a strong or broken rule for the change in impact it can have on a game as written with the new rules).

Just keeping the Universalist wizard with Wish as a spell like ability would address this issue in most high level games since crafting feats wouldn't be required anymore and there is no experience point cost associated with SLAs.

At 4% the current experience point rules do a good job addressing crafting abuse since the other party members can contribute experience for their personal magic items so they do not have to be all shouldered by the crafter with the feat. Consider how much PC crafting has to be going on in a suggested wealth by level game for this to be an issue in game. In games where crafting abuse isn't an issue the crafters still level normally either because DMs ignore the rule or PCs don't level perfectly.

I get so tired of reading posts by designers who said I never intended for it to be utilized that way in game because players utilized the rules as they are written with other source books.

PRCs are a perfect example if a designer wants to bar PC entry before a certain level simply require a common class minimum skill level of 8 if entry is not intended prior to L5.

Crafting is a PC wealth machine in game with a single feat: Mercantile Background from Player's Guide to Faerun (Not the FRCS feat with the same name). The PC can sell weapons, magic items and other adventuring goods for 75% of market price instead of 50% like normal.

It was probably intended by the designer to let the PCs get a little more wealth for their treasure in game but this single feat can test the suggested wealth by level standard in any long term campaign. This feat should have a sidebar or another page devoted to it expounding of how it can affect a campaign like the leadership feat.

Now factor in a single crafting feat making an item for 50% of market cost while being able to sell if for 75% of market cost for having the feat. Now during downtime the PC is a wealth making machine without an experience point cost.

In less than a game year regardless of the level of the campaign this PC should have a major edge over other PCs in the game even with trickle down wealth effects to the party with the current rules particularly with campaigns with prolonged down time. Now throw in crafting without an experience or other significant game cost.

ECS has feats which reduce crafting cost and times.


I too think spell slot loss is even worse.
Spend Xp are gone and you just start collecting new.
Lost spell slots are gone forever and you always have to remember that you have lost a certain slot due to creation.

The most important design rule (in my POV): THE LESS TO REMEMBER/CONSIDER - THE BETTER.

So I would say replace XP costs for additional Gold costs or something easly spend and replaced and everything is just fine.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
CastleMike wrote:


Curious how this will address the issue in game. If there is no effective cost in game it will be abused. (Not saying it will be abused in all games just that the potential will there and it will quickly be identified as a strong or broken rule for the change in impact it can have on a game as written with the new rules).

I just don't see how people keep finding gold to be a limitless resource. If gold is limitless in your campaign, then just pay someone else to craft the magic item for you. The crafting feat makes little difference. From my perspective, ruffly 75% of all player wealth comes from looted magic items (after level 5ish).

A crafting feat lets the players, effectively sell there magical loot and trade it in for an equal value of magical loot they want at the cost of time.

Now taking into account stupid EB feats. You as a GM need to adress it. But even if you can auto sell everything you craft at 75%. You are only making 250gp per day. Yeah, that is quite the income rate, and you can double it to 500gp per day if you take the class/feat that lets you produce 2000gp worth of magic items per day.

Ultimently its going to come down to the GM to put a realistic cap to it. Here comes the tax collector, or here comes the pesky thieves guild etc. Or buyers try up. Or a competitor comes in and undercuts you. If the GM is giving you limitless wealth, you've lost already as far as try to balance party power.


Heaven's Agent wrote:
R_Chance wrote:
Just a thought, but hit them where they live :) Make it cost hit points. Variable amounts maybe... enable human sacrifice for the bad guys. Limit or eliminate the ability to heal this damage magically... The creation of some items might be beyond low level characters due to HP costs. Artifacts might require sacrifices -- literally. Would take some careful thought and a lot of work to implement. Might be fun though.
I think that's probably worse than an XP cost; the traditional magic item crafters are wizards, and their hit points are already a scarcity; I think there would end up being even fewer items crafted than now. And if you allow evil characters to sacrifice others for item creation you'll face balance issues, and the fact that now some characters can't utilize any of the magic equipment obtained from a villain, due to moral incompatibilities.

An XP cost can put them behind the rest of the party for levelling up. Not to speak of the amount of whining they do about it. The "why do I have to lose XP just to craft this incredibly useful magic item" syndrome (yeah, I DM). A HP cost forces them to sacrifice recovery time... make them consider their safety / vulnerability and fort up in a place of safety (I love those towers and hidden labs)...Given the choice of adventuring without their wizard or waiting most parties will wait. It keeps the party on level and provides opportunities for role playing too. The HP sacrifice / option could be combined with alternatives (rare, expensive ingredients that sub for HP, magic items where HP can be sacrificed / stored for a rainy day, rituals where large numbers of the religiously minded sacrifice an HP for the Church, etc.). It would be a considerable departure from current practices, but it has some advantages. Besides, nothing brings out the heroic instinct in most PCs like human sacrifice... nothing denotes evil more fully than ritual sacrifice and torture. If the villains have an edge, the heroes just have to be more... heroic.


DracoDruid wrote:

I too think spell slot loss is even worse.

Spend Xp are gone and you just start collecting new.
Lost spell slots are gone forever and you always have to remember that you have lost a certain slot due to creation.

The most important design rule (in my POV): THE LESS TO REMEMBER/CONSIDER - THE BETTER.

So I would say replace XP costs for additional Gold costs or something easly spend and replaced and everything is just fine.

Good points. Less is always better for rulesets when it comes to stuff. It's just that ... exp cost sits badly with me since it implies that its someone being less able to do something as a result of having spent a lot of time doing something. It offends my ability to suspend disbelief.

I like that other idea of hitpoints.

How about this then? Still nix EXP but make it a Spellcraft check (since it's magical investment after all) to create a magic item.
DC is 15. DC Mods are 0 for Faint, 5 for Moderate, 10 for Strong, 15 for overwhelming. If a person fails then the time is wasted and 50% of the resources consumed (but the item is not ruined - they can still keep going). If they fail by 5-9 then they roll on a funky uh-oh table and lose 50%. Fail by 10+ suffer they roll twice on a funky uh-oh table and item is utterly ruined.

Something along those lines at least. It's not much to whack a task DC with some sort of penalty kicker in and not too much more than simple. Magic crafting is risky - so there should be things that can go wrong.

The end result is you still have a cost/penalty for making magic but there's no exp cost (which as a game mechanic method is great for stopping abuse but as a suspender of DB is annoying).


Hey don't get me wrong: I HATE XP COSTS!!!! (really!) ;)

I would choose either:

1) temporary negative levels
2) simply higher Gold costs for creation


Doug Bragg 172 wrote:
Wicht wrote:
Heaven's Agent wrote:

Perhaps, when a caster creates an item, they lose the ability to cast the spell(s) used in that item's creation for some period of time.

I like that.

And 1 day per 100 gp is workable, or it could just vary based on the item created.

Scrolls = 1 day
Potions = 1 day
Wands = 1 week, etc.

So, either there is a lot of downtime in your games, or your wizards won't be crafting anything.

If the changes to the Wizard class are to allow Wizards the ability to do something useful every rnd of an encounter... why add rules that makes them completely useless for days/weeks?

I think that if you lose the spell, I as a dm would make them lose that spell slot also, for that amount of time. not permentaly.


DracoDruid wrote:

Hey don't get me wrong: I HATE XP COSTS!!!! (really!) ;)

I would choose either:

1) temporary negative levels
2) simply higher Gold costs for creation

I would choose temporary negative levels. Here's why:

The current system (xp cost) has only 1 real effect - for some adventures (but not all) the item crafter fails to have enough xp to go up a level. So, on the next adventure he is a level behind where he should be (effectivly 1 temporary negative level). After that he catches up until this happens again (which may or may not be the next level up).

Actually, there is a second effect, since you can't spend more xp than you have for that level, it does limit the amount of crafting for that level. This rarely comes up because even midlevel PC have more "spare xp" than gold or time.

So, the limits are 1)an occasional temporary negative level and 2)a theoretical time limit before you have to adventure again.

In a xp-cost-free system the cost could be a straightforward 1 negative level that lasts until the completion of your next adventures (or session for long adventures)or 1 year for those who prefer to wait.


Maezer wrote:


I just don't see how people keep finding gold to be a limitless resource. If gold is limitless in your campaign, then just pay someone else to craft the magic item for you. The crafting feat makes little difference. From my perspective, ruffly 75% of all player wealth comes from looted magic items (after level 5ish).

A crafting feat lets the players, effectively sell there magical loot and trade it in for an equal value of magical loot they want at the cost of time.

Now taking into account stupid EB feats. You as a GM need to adress it. But even if you can auto sell everything you craft at 75%. You are only making 250gp per day. Yeah, that is quite the income rate, and you can double it to 500gp per day if you take the class/feat that lets you produce 2000gp worth of magic items per day.

Ultimently its going to come down to the GM to put a realistic cap to it. Here comes the tax collector, or here comes the pesky thieves guild etc. Or buyers try up. Or a competitor comes in and undercuts you. If the GM is giving you limitless wealth, you've lost already as far as try to balance party power.

Regarding your first point it isn't until you factor in feat choices in game. I named the feats and the game mechanic which allows wealth creation in game. Supposedly half the games are below level 10 where 250 gp a day quickly adds up in a suggested wealth by level or tighter wealth game.

Regarding your second point, no that is not how they work.

Regarding your third and fourth point "stupid feats" and targeting the players routinely for making strong feat choices in game. I disagree that doesn't make for a routinely enjoyable playing experience. If you as a DM allow the feat in game whatever your suggested wealth by level standard is for the game. The feat modifies wealth in the player's favor and the players shoulnd't be penalized for taking the feat.

Same thing regarding experience point costs for powerful spells and creating magic items. There is a cost in game that minimizes abuse just because you won't abuse crafting or allow it to be abused or exploited in game does not mean it is not open season for abuse in other games.

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / Alpha Release 1 / Combat & Magic / XP-Cost Removal All Messageboards