Crafting rules are...
In Skills under "Craft".
In Feats under "Item Creation" near the beginning of the chapter and more specific rules with each Item Creation Feat.
I think the solution to the Planar Binding stuff you pointed out could be something like was done for Polymorph, so instead of being able to use any ability of any creature you can summon, the abilities you gain access to are limited to level-appropriate bounds - Even if you call a creature that has certain abilities, if you try to call on them, the spell fails, or the genie laughs in your face and turns against you, whatever...
I don't know if requiring material components for SLAs is really the way to go, since any creature that has relevant SLAs is then 'carrying around' those components, and then what to do for non-corporeal monsters?
...But yeah, there's definetely alot of stuff still missing (Crafting Arrows & Bolts!), even though alot was added into Beta. I'd say there's definetely going to be Beta 2's, 3's, etc... before this process is done.
SLA'ed spells still don't use components
This is the problem here. It is a problematic rule and should be abolished.
Planar Binding is in the Web Enhancement chapter with the free download.
Planar Binding states:
This spell functions like lesser planar binding, except that you may call a single creature of 18 HD or less, or up to three creatures of the same kind whose Hit Dice total no more than 18. Each creature gets a saving throw, makes an independent attempt to escape, and must be individually
persuaded to aid you.
Is this really broken if you have to persuade the creature to aid you?
Is this really broken if you have to persuade the creature to aid you?
YES. "Hey, Efreeti. Gimme three wishes and I'll make first one for your benefit and the other two for mine. Everybody wins."
The Efreeti would have to be brain-dead to turn down an offer like that.
Your best friend should be thrilled to cast an SLA or two for you.
Well Ali Baba had them 40 thieves and
Sheherzadie had a thousand tales!But master---you're in luck 'cause up your sleeves
You got a brand of magic never faaails!
You got some power in your corner now!
Some heavy ammuniation in your camp!
You got some punch, pizzazz, yahoo! and how,
See all you gotta do is rub that lamp
And I'll say:
Mister Aladdin sir, what will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, jot it down--
You ain't never had a friend like me!
The best solution, I think, is to fix the efreeti, to be honest. Rework his wish powers or something. Or make it so the efreeti who CAN grant wishes are 19 HD...
Just checked my 2nd edition MM, seems only 1% of Djinn granted wishes and Efreeti would do so, except they sought to pervert the intent of the wish whenever possible.
Just checked my 2nd edition MM, seems only 1% of Djinn granted wishes and Efreeti would do so, except they sought to pervert the intent of the wish whenever possible.
The "...and then you DIE!" method of balancing out wishes is even worse than making them abuseable.
|
Efreeti would do so, except they sought to pervert the intent of the wish whenever possible.
This is my approach with wish milkers. After the first time, it should be obvious that they're riding a tiger every time they treat with genies.
The "...and then you DIE!" method of balancing out wishes is even worse than making them abuseable.
Only if you use it like a sledgehammer(as in "..and then you die."). Having a subtle cost and playing on the characters wording is where it's at.
Characters should eventually learn to be nervous or at least respectful and careful when getting wishes from strange genies.
It should be pointed out this use of the wish never actually does anything directly. It gets absorbed as a component of crafting, which makes it *extremely safe* to do.Efreeti would do so, except they sought to pervert the intent of the wish whenever possible.
This is my approach with wish milkers. After the first time, it should be obvious that they're riding a tiger every time they treat with genies.
The "...and then you DIE!" method of balancing out wishes is even worse than making them abuseable.Only if you use it like a sledgehammer(as in "..and then you die."). Having a subtle cost and playing on the characters wording is where it's at.
Characters should eventually learn to be nervous or at least respectful and careful when getting wishes from strange genies.
If you're demanding that many wishes from a Genie, in my game this would seriously become a campaign theme. If you're abusing it, maybe the local City of Brass brute squad will have something to say, err do to you. If not that, what prevents an Efreet from casting planar binding on you once it knows the infringing PC's name ;)
|
|
I found 3.P on SLAs. No noticeable change. Chapter 10 pg. 16 of the chapter pdf, page 169 of the book.
A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component , nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability’s use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.
Yeah, I would want to open that "has no" to "might", but that would require a LOT of addenedum to monster entries, and I think that's outside the scope of the core sourcebook.(correct me if I'm wrong on that)
Some abilities need baggage, both to possibly benefit and hinder players.
You're not an outsider, therefore Planar Binding cannot be cast on you. =p
Further, there are an infinite number of efreeti (because the plane of fire is infinitely large), thus the chance that any pattern of behavior is noticed is actually 0, because the probability that two efreeti who have been bound by you ever meet is also 0. (Infinity causes weird stuff to happen). So there's never any reason for the City of Brass to retaliate.
ehh... isn't any being outside their home plane an 'outsider'?
and the 'infinite' thing... the actual universe may or may not be infinite, right?
does that correspond to whether there is an infinite number of humans? not really, i think.
though obviously, if the genie find a win-win situation for themselves, no harm done.
(except gamebalance wise) :-)
Only if you use it like a sledgehammer(as in "..and then you die."). Having a subtle cost and playing on the characters wording is where it's at.Characters should eventually learn to be nervous or at least respectful and careful when getting wishes from strange genies.
It's either unreasonable twisting that will make any wish backfire ("...and then you die!"), or all you're doing is making players write up some legalese (or find some; google Open-Source Wishes) which isn't a balancing factor at all.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
What about the optional rule: “Every ‘unnatural’ increase in wealth has an equal and opposite CR appropriate encounter – you just get the treasure first”? Which applies for:
Spellcaster shenanigans (selling walls of iron, efreet bargaining, lantern archon created continual flames)
Running a profitable empire / business / temple
Exceptional thievery above and beyond the call of duty
Your PC just became a “triple standard” treasure monster – those things have usually a very short life expectancy, or their level becomes quickly appropriate for their wealth.
On a serious note, if you don’t like the “DM intervention solves everything” angle have SLA’s with expensive (pick a number – 5000gp?) material cost cause the creature to gain a negative level for (pick a number – 101?) days. The Efreet may think this falls under a “unreasonable” command (“I’m not going back to the City of Brass with 3 negative levels – that’s just asking to be enslaved for the next ten thousand years. I’ve only got to wait around here until I roll a natural 20 on my Cha check.”) and refuse.
You're not an outsider, therefore Planar Binding cannot be cast on you.
You are considered an outsider when the native to the plane is on their own plane and trying to bind you to their plane. IOW, you are an outsider to the Plane of Fire when the summoner/binder is a genie in the City of Brass.
Your other points are entirely up to you if that's the way you want to play 'em.
It's either unreasonable twisting that will make any wish backfire ("...and then you die!"), or all you're doing is making players write up some legalese (or find some; google Open-Source Wishes) which isn't a balancing factor at all.
I think the disagreement here is whether this should be a DM-managed balance factor or a rules-managed balance situation regarding these kinds of scenarios. Depends on the type of people you play with I guess.
It's either unreasonable twisting that will make any wish backfire ("...and then you die!"), or all you're doing is making players write up some legalese (or find some; google Open-Source Wishes) which isn't a balancing factor at all.I think the disagreement here is whether this should be a DM-managed balance factor or a rules-managed balance situation regarding these kinds of scenarios. Depends on the type of people you play with I guess.
D&D is a very rules-heavy game. Rules-heavy games should not be relying on DM management.
The DM can always change things. Relying on it in a rules-heavy game is really bad form. It's saying "this is broken and we don't care, fix it yourself."
|
|
It's either unreasonable twisting that will make any wish backfire ("...and then you die!"), or all you're doing is making players write up some legalese (or find some; google Open-Source Wishes) which isn't a balancing factor at all.
That depends on just how much you're folding into "unreasonable". Remember, these are efreeti we're talking about.
And actually legalese is a big part of most genie-types' culture in the settings I've run, some right up there with devils and the Fraternity of Order.
I think the disagreement here is whether this should be a DM-managed balance factor or a rules-managed balance situation regarding these kinds of scenarios. Depends on the type of people you play with I guess.
I have to admit I fall in the DM-managed section most of the time when overpowering complications like this come up. However, it has to be done reasonably in the context of the setting, and not be something that will take the players by surprise(the characters, maybe).
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4
|
This is the most interesting discussion of rules/flavor balance I've ever read. Thank you, everyone!
My quick & unedited thoughts:
1 - the theme of bound genies granting wishes is an integral part not only of the broad fantasy-adventure genre, but specifically of the Pathfinder Setting itself: see the "Ipeq" entry on Osirion in the PCCS, page 119. Now, obviously, the "legend" may be false, but the people of the Inner Sea arguably have good reason to believe that genies can be bound, and that genies grant wishes.
... as did Real-World, Earthling humans, I suppose, and with less evidence to support that theory, but whatever.
2 - anyone with the out-and-out balls to use planar binding on an efreeti is asking for trouble. While efreet may not have the [Evil] sub-type descriptor, which would make the spell an evil act to cast, they ARE very dangerous, and they're "always Lawful Evil".
... come to think of it, that might actually solve the problem right there: giving the efreet the [Evil] sub-type effectively makes the spell an NPC-only effect. Yes, there are games in which the PCs willingly commit evil acts, but they aren't the norm, and a GM willing to run that game MUST be willing to make more assumptions about what is and isn't allowed at the table than other games. In this instance, with [Evil]-typed Efreet, using the chain-summon becomes just one more way of selling your soul for power - same as yelling "Pazuzu" a few times.
3 - while this is a fascinating rules loophole, and one I'm absolutely DELIGHTED to be clued-into, it is my opinion that an immortal being of inhuman origin, super-human abilities and a nature best summed up as "the Personification of Burning, Fascistic Malevolence" should NEVER be treated as a candy dispenser, no matter what the rules say.
As a storyteller, I'd HAVE to rule that limitless free wishes are like any form of zero-cost or perpetual-motion machine: they function on paper only. Once the rubber hits the road and real-world friction gets into the gears, it all comes apart under its own power.
... still, an AWESOME loophole - thank you for sharing!
That said... the concept of genies granting wishes is awesome and classic and needs to stay in the game.
Tis a conundrum.
Why not let genies grant limited wishes instead? They still are wishes. They are still quite powerful. Limited Wish is much clearer in what it can and can't do, so it's easier for GMs to adjudicate. And it removes the chain-binding nonsense from the game.
My first suggestion might be to make it so creatures summoned with planar binding have limited access to spell-like abilities. Like you need to actually provide the components to them. Maybe the summoned creature can not use spell-like abilities of a higher level than planar binding, only use spell-like abilities whose level is equal to or less than planar binding a more limited number times per day.
My first suggestion might be to make it so creatures summoned with planar binding have limited access to spell-like abilities. Like you need to actually provide the components to them. Maybe the summoned creature can not use spell-like abilities of a higher level than planar binding, only use spell-like abilities whose level is equal to or less than planar binding a more limited number times per day.
That doesn't address the fundamental problem.
The problem is not Planar Binding.The problem is that SLAs do not use material components. This isn't the only place where that's problematic.
My first suggestion might be to make it so creatures summoned with planar binding have limited access to spell-like abilities. Like you need to actually provide the components to them. Maybe the summoned creature can not use spell-like abilities of a higher level than planar binding, only use spell-like abilities whose level is equal to or less than planar binding a more limited number times per day.That doesn't address the fundamental problem.
The problem is not Planar Binding.
The problem is that SLAs do not use material components. This isn't the only place where that's problematic.
And a 6th level spell that gives access to a 9th level spell is not something that should possibly be addressed. Got it.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Technically, the SRD is wrong and Paizo doubly wrong. You must expend the spell each day of crafting (ie, wish), and it takes 7 days to craft one. Thus, you actually use Wish 7x (not 5), making the market price actually 187.5kgp in...
Spells used for crafting don't take xp/material components, so that's not a problem. You use the slot, but you don't actually cast per se. That's why there are notes about providing material component costs for wands and scrolls.
There is a contradiction on this in the SRD under "armor", but it is a fairly obvious mistake, and is correct under the other magic items.
D&D is a very rules-heavy game. Rules-heavy games should not be relying on DM management.
The DM can always change things. Relying on it in a rules-heavy game is really bad form. It's saying "this is broken and we don't care, fix it yourself."
But you're going to fall into situations like this in a number of different ways with complex rules systems. I'm not saying they shouldn't take steps to mitigate them, but the question is, do you try and fix the outlying situations with solutions that reduce the feel or flavor of the game for the sake of balance?
the game expects you to have a few +5 inherent bonuses by 20th level, making this stupidly hard to do helps no one
Cite please? As far as I can tell, you just made that up right now.
At any rate, they didn't change the price of the various tomes, so pain-free inherent bonuses are still available (but not from efreeti wishes).
I agree that Planar Binding & Gate need to go back to the drawing board, though. And wishes should probably be reserved for special, noble efreeti/djinni (or something like that).
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Some months ago, there was a poster here who took several assumptions (player characters always have four encounters a day, characters always have 13 or 14 encounters per level, etc.) and insisted that the 3.5 rules were obviously broken, because they required characters to rise from 1st level to 20th in about two game months.
I argued then, that the problem wasn't the rules (in that case, experience point tables), it was the assumptions that poster made.
--+--+--
I'm going to present the same claim here, squirrelloid, in the possibly naive view that you're open to a reasoned discussion about your assumptions.
First off, planar binding an efreet to cast wishes does not "break the game". Neither "obviously", nor otherwise. It hasn't broken my campaigns, the campaigns of my friends, or any of the campaigns I've seen played out. People have fun with the system, even at some higher levels, and this odd loop-hole simply does not break our games.
If it breaks your game, why do you let it? When your player makes this argument, why do you shrug and let the efreeti cave in to such a patent request?
You say that there are an infinite number of efreeti. That's in your campaign, not the baseline D&D campaign, where the rules are silent on the issue. It's also perfectly reasonable that a planar binding keeps trapping the weakest efreeti, who are getting sick of the humiliation.
You assume that there's no reason that a genie would refuse to grant such a wish. But efreeti are lawful evil, and they don't like people, so it's perfectly in keeping with their malevolent nature to refuse to deal with such a summoner. And once a caster tries repeatedly to deal with efreeti in this way, she'll end up with dozens of bound efreeti steaming mad at her, waiting for someone to come along and release them. What could possibly go wrong there?
You assume that efreeti would not twist the words of such wishes, to the detriment of the caster. Why on the seven planes not? Because, out of game reality, this would be an unpleasant, possibly lethal situation for the caster? Most likely. I'd wager that the player's next character won't try to wreck the campaign like that.
You've made a lot of assumptions about genies --how many there are and how they would behave-- and they've painted you into a corner to say that the game system is broken. The problem isn't in the game system; it's in your assumptions.
--+--+--
This strikes me a lot like the silly little ladder / ten-foot-pole issue. It's a quirk of the price charts, and in the absence of a DM, it could "break the game system". Those kinds of things are fun to spot, but they certainly aren't "broken". Because D&D isn't a video game. PC's don't do infinite power-ups, or whatever the analogue would be in money. If your players are trying to do this, then tell them to quit horsing around and get to adventuring.
--+--+--
D&D is a very rules-heavy game. Rules-heavy games should not be relying on DM management.
The DM can always change things. Relying on it in a rules-heavy game is really bad form. It's saying "this is broken and we don't care, fix it yourself."
Obviously, I disagree.
D&D is a game about telling stories about heroic characters. How you tell them, and the kinds of stories, differ from campaign to campaign. But the rules are there to allow groups of friends to tell stories.
The rules for, in this instance, binding outsiders are there to guide people in the storytelling. The rules aren't there to create, in Boomer's terminology, a perpetual motion wish machine. That's the critical difference.
If a rules isn't fulfilling its purpose, it should be fixed; we're agreed on that. If a set of rules can be abused outside of its purpose, then that's not so much a problem with the rules.
|
|
Could you make it so you need to know the exact or true name of the creature/s you call. For planar binding at least that makes the job harder and certainly slows down/prevents chain binding. Could do the same for gate.
Still leaves it open for abuse in campaigns where a GM doesn't care, but allows for more limitations for those that do. I imagine finding the TRUE name of a planar creature would not be that easy to do as they'd be fairly careful about it. Since I feel the game is about flexibility as much as anything else this may work.
This is not the type of information to be left to a dice roll (gather info, knowledge the planes etc), but needs to be gamed for. That could be written into the rules as well. This also then leaves it open to your GM to play as they see fit. Allows for power play if you want but also allows for GM intervention within a rules defined environment.
Could also make it so only one task is able to be completed, which prevents the idea of just finding one name then making it tell you a whole swag of others.
Just throwing some ideas into the mix
|
You're not an outsider, therefore Planar Binding cannot be cast on you.You are considered an outsider when the native to the plane is on their own plane and trying to bind you to their plane. IOW, you are an outsider to the Plane of Fire when the summoner/binder is a genie in the City of Brass.
That is not correct.
What plane you are on, what plane you are native to, and what plane others, who are attempting to effect you with a spell, are on have no bearing on your creature type.
You are either of the type Outsider, or you are not.
You may or may not have the (extraplanar) subtype, depending on your current plane, your native plane, and the plane of the creature trying to affect you with a spell, but your type does not change.
My suggestion would be to make the genies wish cost the summoner the same XP (etc) that casting a wish spell directly would. That cuts down on its utility slightly... although there's potentially still some level issues, admittedly.
You're not an outsider, therefore Planar Binding cannot be cast on you.You are considered an outsider when the native to the plane is on their own plane and trying to bind you to their plane. IOW, you are an outsider to the Plane of Fire when the summoner/binder is a genie in the City of Brass.That is not correct.
What plane you are on, what plane you are native to, and what plane others, who are attempting to effect you with a spell, are on have no bearing on your creature type.
You are either of the type Outsider, or you are not.
You may or may not have the (extraplanar) subtype, depending on your current plane, your native plane, and the plane of the creature trying to affect you with a spell, but your type does not change.
Oops, sorry. Thanks for the clarification.
If a rules isn't fulfilling its purpose, it should be fixed; we're agreed on that. If a set of rules can be abused outside of its purpose, then that's not so much a problem with the rules.
The problem is that one person's "use" is another person's "abuse". For instance, a player might think it's reasonable to summon an efreet once for some cheap Wishes if it's an emergency, but the DM might think that it's never reasonable, even if he's indicated that "anything Core is fine".
I had this happen in a game once. Our party was infiltrating a fire giant fortress (and doing a fairly poor job at being sneaky) when we were attacked by half-fiend fire giant swordsages. We were routed pretty badly and suffered a few casualties, so we took the opportunity to prepare for a second assault. One of the things my character bought was a scroll of Gate; the DM didn't have any problem with that at the time. But when we returned to the fortress and I tried to use it to summon a solar to help us, he basically said "uh-uh, no way, that's not possible".
I don't have any problem with that, of course, but it sort of throws the idea of "everything Core is balanced and acceptable" out the window.
|
|
Heh.
Lately, when I read threads like this, it makes me so very aware that though we might use the same books, the actual game some people play looks absolutely nothing like mine.
Basically, Chris summarized about everything I would say on the issue. This strikes me as another place where its not so much a rules problem as it is a DM problem. If there is a fix, changing the monster description per James suggestion above seems to me the easiest and best.
Editing a monster, or several, for the sake of a spell seems to me to be.. overly cumbersome.
Rather, we need to edit the spell.
When it was seen that monsters could summon monsters could summon monsters could summon monsters, the game was changed simply to add the sentence prohibiting summoned creatures from using their summoning powers.
It seems to me that a similar such limitation could be tacked onto any such spell that can call or gate or summon or whatever, a monster from the MM.
A limitation such as:
Creatures called using this spell are inhibited from casting or using any form or ability of Wish or Miracle, whether as a spell or a Spell Like Ability.
This could be tacked onto:
Lesser Planar Ally (and it's normal and greater buddies)
Gate
Any other spell or whatnot that has the effect.
The cost of any such magical item that would mimic these spells, in order to get at a "free wish" should have its creation cost summarily raised.
Alternatively- two versions could exist.
Ring of Summoning Wishless Genie
and
Ring of Summoning Wish-Capable Genie.
(ring, brazier, lamp, whatever), with the cost of creation (and thus Market Cost) being commesurate with the ability bestowed by whatever lives in the item.
This means that later books can freely create critters- much like the new Wildshape limitations have done- without having to worry about problematic Gates/Greater Planar Ally problems.
Another solution is to add some strict language as to how exactly you "get them to agree" to help you.
annd.. errm.
Under "Lesser" and "Greater" in Beta it says that spells are listed alphabetically with out regard to Lesser and Greater.
However- there is no "Planar-" anything in the spell descriptions.
No Lesser Planer Ally, greater, or normal. Does this mean the spells are gone? Or is it an unintentional omission? hrm.
Anyhoo- just my thoughts.
-S
|
|
I guess I am old school. I don't DM by the RAW, that just makes the DM a computer to process results and AI of the mobs. No thanks. I'd rather play WoW.
Any wish that is granted by any means - Ring, Efreet, Deck of many things, magical water-spewing-duck fountain named Howard...whatever - in my campaigns are old school "DM wishes". They are not a 9th level wizard spell. Wishing for things that mimic the 9th level wizard spell is usually the safest. Artifacts and efreeti wishes always come with strings attached.
I don't let gamers who "game" the system at the expense of story into my games. So it's never a problem. But for those gamists out there, how in the heck is it fun to find and play the "I win" card. That's lame and unskilled. I can "game" with the best of them, but I would never stoop to such low tactics. I'll willingly "ignore" such loopholes and still mop the floor with the blood of whatever is thrown at me.