I think you underestimate the amount of metal in a longsword and overestimate the amount of metal in a chain shirt.
A lighter weapon is all well and good, but a certain amount of the damage done is from kinetic energy. Damage done by mithril weapons with slash or crush profiles should be reduced. Take your Louisville Slugger and make a replica from balsa wood (ignore the breakage factor), then try to bash something with them.
Production time for a chain shirt versus a longsword should be the biggest factor involved in their cost comparison. Given a workman that has the skill and the facilities required to work mithril (which should be uncommon), it takes a while longer to put together 800(?) or so small rings into a shirt than it does to turn a bar into a sword.
Edit: I forgot to voice my distaste for the proliferation of mithril. IF a mithril shirt shows up in my campaign, only a fool would sell it.
A lighter weapon is all well and good, but a certain amount of the damage done is from kinetic energy. Damage done by mithril weapons with slash or crush profiles should be reduced. Take your Louisville Slugger and make a replica from balsa wood (ignore the breakage factor), then try to bash something with them.
You're ignoring a few factors here, but most obviously quality of material. A lead sword is going to weigh more than a steel one, but it sure as hell won't do as much damage. Your balsa bat won't hurt as badly as a hardwood one at least in part because it's going to break if you hit anything with it.
Production time for a chain shirt versus a longsword should be the biggest factor involved in their cost comparison. Given a workman that has the skill and the facilities required to work mithril (which should be uncommon), it takes a while longer to put together 800(?) or so small rings into a shirt than it does to turn a bar into a sword.
Really? So you've worked mithral then? Maybe it's harder to work it so that it retains an edge than it is to work it into rings.
Average weight of an actual riveted mail hauberk/shirt is 25 pounds.
Which is not all metal.
Average weight of an actual riveted mail hauberk/shirt is 25 pounds.Which is not all metal.The 25 lbs is the chain hauberk itself. All metal. That is not counting the usual gambeson or arming jacket commonly worn under it. At most the arming jacket/gambeson might add 3 to 5 pounds. That still leave 20 lbs of metal. Since there is no mention of an arming jacket or gameson in the armor description that would actually up the weight of the armor to 27-30 lbs.
-Weylin
Since chainmail is useless without protective clothing underneath it, I'd say it's far more likely that said clothing is already included.
It also leaves an explanation I've already offered ;)
Well, to be blunt, making chainmail is apprentice work. Drawing wire is dead-easy, as is turning the wire into rings and snapping the rings together. Every bit of literature and period research I've ever read has indicated that chainmail was merely a time sink with no real skill involved whatsoever.
Making a sword? That's something completely different.
EDIT: And Mithral doesn't require a masterwork component. Mithral is, by its very nature, masterwork equipment.
Sharpening a sword is also apprentice work usually, so that negates the earlier statement you made.
That is NOT what I said. Please go back and read again.
Fine, allow me to rephrase:
The properties that are useful for armor are not the same properties that are useful for weapons. It's quite possible that mithral needs to be alloyed with different metals to be useful as a weapon, and that those different metals change its forging profile in a manner that makes it take more skill and/or time to forge a weapon than a suit of armor.
And we are debating the general rules far more than personal or setting views.
Yes, and the general rules are different for weapons and armor.
Hmmmmmmm.....
EDIT: Not to mention that it DOES require different treatment to make a weapon out of steel than it does out of armor. At least, it does if you ask the Damascus swordsmiths or the master smiths of Japan.
The general idea behind Mithral is that you are paying for the skill to make the item, not for x lbs of metal per item. this is why it costs the same for a mithral mace as a longsword, and a chain shirt as a breastplate. the true cost factor is the skill.
And mithral is figured by adding it to the basis of a masterwork x item, is it not?
The only problem with mithral is it is not properly reflected in the crafting rules. It should take 5-7 ranks in a skill, minimum, before you KNOW how to craft mithral, reflecting advanced knowledge in metallurgy and a rare, precious substance. Should be 8-10 ranks for adamantine, which makes smiths who can work either system appropriately skilled...and rare.
Making stuff out of rare metals should involve higher level craft checks too...like 25 DC for mithral, and 30 for adamantine.
==Aelryinth
The general idea behind Mithral is that you are paying for the skill to make the item, not for x lbs of metal per item. this is why it costs the same for a mithral mace as a longsword, and a chain shirt as a breastplate. the true cost factor is the skill.
And mithral is figured by adding it to the basis of a masterwork x item, is it not?
The only problem with mithral is it is not properly reflected in the crafting rules. It should take 5-7 ranks in a skill, minimum, before you KNOW how to craft mithral, reflecting advanced knowledge in metallurgy and a rare, precious substance. Should be 8-10 ranks for adamantine, which makes smiths who can work either system appropriately skilled...and rare.
Making stuff out of rare metals should involve higher level craft checks too...like 25 DC for mithral, and 30 for adamantine.
==Aelryinth
Actually, from my perspective, I'm happy it doesn't take so many ranks in Craft to make it possible. Last time I checked it was the standard DC of the item, but due to the cost factor it would take much, much longer to complete the item unless you have a hefty modifier to your craft result (since you can willingly increase the DC multiplier to craft faster).
This means that while crafting a mithril chain shirt wouldn't be any more complicated than crafting one from steel, it's going to take longer. This added time can be explained in countless ways, varying from person to person; and it works in a game perspective.
From the perspective of a player, I would say that I enjoy the fact my elven fighter with ranks in craft armor can forge herself a masterwork mithril chain shirt a few levels earlier than she could actually afford to purchase one, or forge a pair of adamantine shortswords in the same fashion. From the perspective of a GM, I have no problem with this as it doesn't upset the flow of the game at all.
On a side note, some have suggested that in the case of weapons, Mithril should be treated as Silver (without the alchemical silver damage penalty) due to the increased cost and lack of meaningful benefit in lighter weaponry (for a mechanical standpoint). This idea is further backed by the Tolkien books, which define Mithril as Truesilver, and one of the most treasured metals. Such things are entirely just potential house rules and interesting fluff. ^_^
|
We've already had this discussion.
If you go to the end of it you'll see that I standardized mithral, adamantine, and alchemical silver charts in terms of display. In the end only a few light one handed mithral weapons winds up being more expensive and every other mithral weapon winds up cheaper.
I see Freesword beat me to it. So I'll just actually post the relevant part.
First the Mithral breakdown
+600gp for one handed or one end of a double weapon
+1000gp for two handed or both ends or a double weapon*
+400gp for light weapons
+15gp for each piece of ammunitionThis winds up being more expensive for a few light weapons, but cheaper for 90% of the weapons on the chart.
Now adamantine breakdown
+3000gp for one handed weapons or one end of a double weapon
+5000gp for two handed weapons or both ends of a double weapon*
+2000gp for a light weapon
+60gp for each piece of ammunitionthis winds up costing a player more for double weapons, but makes light weapons and ammunition cheaper so I think it balances out.
* a two handed weapon can be made at the cost of a one handed weapon if it has a wooden haft (i.e. longspear, glaive, etc.), however it's hardness will not change for the purposes of sunder.
|
|
I think you underestimate the amount of metal in a longsword and overestimate the amount of metal in a chain shirt.+1
-1
I think it's silly to say the weight of the underclothes that protect you from the pinching links is more than 5 lbs, assuming of course that mithral actually needs it, since there are stories like say LotR where mithral was worn under the clothes because the links were so fine that they didn't pinch. I think this is a case of carryover from 3.5, where the chart said the exact same thing it does now, but before had no advantage to make weapons from and therefor had no breakdown. They added that mithral beats DR so now weapons benefit, but then they didn't bother to adjust the chart. Everything else just sounds like stretched rationals to explain what was obviously just not bothered to change.
EDIT: Not to mention that it DOES require different treatment to make a weapon out of steel than it does out of armor. At least, it does if you ask the Damascus swordsmiths or the master smiths of Japan.
Side note: thats because they had inferior ore to work with and had to develop a folding technique to work out inherent flaws in the metal.
|
|
I find it a trend across several threads that statements include "silly/stupid"; is that necessary? Speaking generally, why is that done?
And related to this, I'm trying to understand why players of this age "demand" the buying/forging of weaponry and armor with affordable yet exotic materials, and at RL market prices with RL technology comparisons. Speaking generally, what is going on?
|
|
I find it a trend across several threads that statements include "silly/stupid"; is that necessary? Speaking generally, why is that done?
And related to this, I'm trying to understand why players of this age "demand" the buying/forging of weaponry and armor with affordable yet exotic materials, and at RL market prices with RL technology comparisons. Speaking generally, what is going on?
Not asking for IRL prices, would just like something that was a little more based on the amount of materials as well as type used in construction of items.
Not to mention some internal consistency when it comes to special materials.
For example, Dragonhide and Cold Iron have cost multipliers while Alchemical Silver, Mithril and Adamantine have cost additives.
Continuing, Alchemical Silver treatment has varied cost by the type of weapon. Yet Adamantine and Mithril have it based purely on weight.
If you are going to use cost multipliers then I feel that should be the case for all special materials. If you are going to break down cost by weapon form (light, one-handed, two-handed) for one type of material then I feel it should be that way for all materials.
Charge me twice what the costs are now, as long as the system is internally consistent, i'm good.
-Weylin
while normally I'm not that big on consistency across different types, here is the one instance where I agree some consistency would be nice. Materials should all be treated the same in pricing. I prefer the by type method rather than a multiplier, but I didn't even think of dragonhide or some other materials. So maybe a multiplier would be best (and at the same time the most logical).
On an unrelated note, I'm the one who uses silly a lot, sorry, but I calls em like I sees em. I'll try to use it less, but I don't mean to offend and of all silly's synonyms silly seems the least offensive to me. I try never to say stupid.
|
|
IRL, the cost of a lot of things doesn't make sense.
Just look at any fashion show, and you will get a pretty good example of what I mean. Maybe mithril swords are all the rage, and the mithril-smith is charging an inflated rate ?
I know it's an easy answer, but just change it in your game, if it does not suit you.
And things you read in Japanese museums don't have a tiny nationalistic tone? Like how they were forced into that minor conflict in 1942.
There could be a million and one reasons why there are price diferences in stuff as much in a fantasy world as in real life.
Maybe it is because its harder to make swords than chain.
Maybe its because the demand for swords means the price is higher.
Maybe its just because.
Zurai has a point about the cost however IMO.
*edit* If people really want to know all the ins and outs of this kind of stuff I have a friend who makes it for Viking battle re-enactments. I can ask.
And things you read in Japanese museums don't have a tiny nationalistic tone? Like how they were forced into that minor conflict in 1942.No more than our euro-centric history books deningrate every non-white culture to exist before the American Civil War...
It is only because they owe us for us going to the trouble of discovering them. 8)
|
|
There could be a million and one reasons why there are price diferences in stuff as much in a fantasy world as in real life.
Maybe it is because its harder to make swords than chain.
Maybe its because the demand for swords means the price is higher.
Maybe its just because.
Zurai has a point about the cost however IMO.
*edit* If people really want to know all the ins and outs of this kind of stuff I have a friend who makes it for Viking battle re-enactments. I can ask.
And maybe it just wasn't changed from 3.5 when it wasn't considered a weapons material because no one thought of it? Why is that so hard to believe especially when if you look at page 283 of the 3.5 DMG its the exact same chart?
And maybe it just wasn't changed from 3.5 when it wasn't considered a weapons material because no one thought of it? Why is that so hard to believe especially when if you look at page 283 of the 3.5 DMG its the exact same chart?
Because we know that section wasn't just copy-pasted. Mithral has changed in function since 3.5; mithral armor still requires the appropriate proficiency, for example, and mithral weapons function as silver ones. It's much easier to believe that they kept the same prices on purpose than it is to believe they changed the entire text entry and didn't even look at the pricing chart before copying it over.
Side note: thats because they had inferior ore to work with and had to develop a folding technique to work out inherent flaws in the metal.Side-side note: while Japan did have inferior iron ore to deal with, the statement that the folding technique was developed to combat that handicap is at odds with the literature handed out at the Japanese Sword Museum in Tokyo, at least as of May 2009 :P
Japanese folded steel is superior to European sword steel -- FALSEFolding steel was a technique used by Japanese smiths to try to get the best steel they could from
very poor ore sources. Folded steel blades are more likely than modern monosteels to have large,
unseen inclusions of impurities that may in fact critically weaken a blade. By folding the steel billet
many, many times, they achieved a more even distribution of carbon and worked most of the impurities
out of the steel. The result is stunningly beautiful, but we have to believe that if a 16th C
Japanese smith had access to modern monosteels, he would have switched in a heartbeat.
Its from a professional sword making/selling company, which I would hope has its facts straight.
Um yeah they did that, that's not suggestion that's in the rules. Unless you mean that they should be priced the same as alchemical silver without the damage penalty, I don't agree with that.
On a side note, some have suggested that in the case of weapons, Mithril should be treated as Silver
Sorry, I haven't scrounged up enough cash to purchase the Pathfinder books yet. Hopefully by Christmas I'll be able to save up the cash for at least the main books. Currently I'm working off the PF-Beta and 3.5 line, so I wasn't aware they actually made Mithril "silver" for the purposes of damage reduction.
I'm glad they did, if that's the case.
|
Equipment and special materials (and magic item pricing to some extent) has always been an issue for many editions of D&D. Pathfinder is no different IMHO.
The problem is its VERY abstract.
Armor has a single price for a full suit but its often the case that in real world history only those rich enough to afford a fully made suit of full plate would have such armor in a full suit, everyone else used pieces of suits mixed together for the best protection.
Weapons are incredibly inconsistant, The monk weapons are specific definitions such as the kama sai and nunchaku but swords are very broad groups... theres no broadsword, claymore, flamberge, wakisashi or the many over varieties available, Yet why is there a katana?
On to pricing and the biggest flaw starts with masterwork. Why does a Mwk longsword cost 315gp yet a Mwk Quarterstaff cost 600gp !!! As mentioned earlier the special materials also provide issues based on application to armor and weapons.
Finally Magic Items are priced into ludicruous values compared to the rest of the market. No way should a +1 longsword that the 3rd level party have got spare cost 2,315gp ok they can only sell it for half that but just what effect would 1,157.5gp have if given to a commoner to sell? he could feed his entire extended family for years!
----------------------------------------------------
All of these systems have a flaw but at the end of the day they provide enough functionality to work with-in the game so they have remained.
Attempts have been made in the past to expand on the existing rules via books like the Arms and Equipment guide but they usually inherit all the flaws present above.
Sure I would love to see more expanded (and completely revamped) rules on armor and weapons and a rehash of pricing to be more realistic but to do that would require as large a tome as the original 3.5 PHB and certainly not as a simple chapter in the Core Rulebook.
It is only because they owe us for us going to the trouble of discovering them. 8)No more than our euro-centric history books deningrate every non-white culture to exist before the American Civil War...
[eddie izzard]"Do you have a flag? No?..."[/eddie izzard]
|
|
Weylin, I hear what your saying and perhaps an expansion of the equipment/special materials/magic items would be fairly small but what I was more looking at is a complete rework of all three.
This would include rules for different qualities or weapons (crude to masterwork); piecemail armor; detailed consideration of different tech levels and the weapons and armor stat modifications and costs involved (the romans used mainly bronze in their construction while the english longbow totally changed the face of combat on the battlefield that saw the decline of fullplate armor.); A fully detailed crafting system that uses materials that could be added as treasure and used in the construction of potions and other magic items (something that sees alot of use in computer games but rarely makes it into Pen and Paper rules).
The book I possess that closely looks at weapons and armor to a large degree is an old Palladium Fantasy RPG rulebook called "The Compendium of Weapons, Armor and Castles" detailing over 700 weapons, 40 armors and 40 castles over 224 pages with full illustrations for every one! My version is the Third Printing dated August 1993 but its First printing was in 1989.
I think Pazio would strike gold if they could produce a similar kind of rulebook for the current PFRPG rules.
Hey, while you're rewriting the mundane equipment pricing system, do you think you could tweak the magic pricing system too? I'm tired of my +1 dagger being valued the same as a titan's +1 greataxe.
|
|
And maybe it just wasn't changed from 3.5 when it wasn't considered a weapons material because no one thought of it? Why is that so hard to believe especially when if you look at page 283 of the 3.5 DMG its the exact same chart?Because we know that section wasn't just copy-pasted. Mithral has changed in function since 3.5; mithral armor still requires the appropriate proficiency, for example, and mithral weapons function as silver ones. It's much easier to believe that they kept the same prices on purpose than it is to believe they changed the entire text entry and didn't even look at the pricing chart before copying it over.
You're absolutely right, they changed it so they must have changed everything about it, like the grapple rules, they changed those so every section that deals with grappling was re-written to adapt to the change, oh and monster types, those were changed since they had changes to monsters no admitted copy/paste errors there. I think it's much more likely that they didn't consider the change to pricing of weapons by calculating every single weapon than it is to believe that they intentionally made mithral dagger cheaper than a masterwork steel dagger, and a mithral greataxe as expensive as a mithral chain shirt, yeah it's much more reasonable to assume he did it intentionally when he's working on a 500 odd page rule book. Mithral didn't undergo fundamental changes, two bonus rules suggested by the boards were added. Neither of which at face value would require a reworking of the rules until you actually start doing the math on every single weapon. Considering everything else on his plate I'm much more indisposed to believe that the iniquities weren't caught then that he intentionally left the obvious holes in the pricing, when he changed the price of a ten foot pole.