So my group was just subjected to a TPK at the hands of a dracolisk and so we are starting a new campaign at Level 6.
Would I be wrong to ask my DM since I am playing a Druid that I be allowed to craft my own magic items before play begins.
This would essentially allow me to have a +2 set of armor and weapon rather than a +1
|
I'd allow it. The standard starting gold based on level is determined by trying to guess how much gold worth of loot an adventurer has accrued by level x. That doesn't take into account those characters with item creation feats that could have made the majority of their gear for cheaper than list cost. The same goes with crafting skills.
|
So my group was just subjected to a TPK at the hands of a dracolisk and so we are starting a new campaign at Level 6.
Would I be wrong to ask my DM since I am playing a Druid that I be allowed to craft my own magic items before play begins.
This would essentially allow me to have a +2 set of armor and weapon rather than a +1
Not really game breaking, but I think if it was me I'd probably decline the request. The wealth levels reflect the value of your gear, not what you paid for it. You could just as easily say you made the magic items, but it wouldn't save you any money. But hey, you could ask and see what he said. But I don't think it would be fair to the other PCs.
Well, if he disagrees you can simply say you take all your starting gold as actual gold, and then spend the first month of the campaign crafting your gear. He'll probably see things your way then :)
I would definately allow you to craft some magic items, but probably not all. I dont have a set system at the moment for higher then level 1 starts yet since we havent done one yet. But I would say something like you can use 1/3-1/2 of your starting level 6 gold to craft, and the rest is in purchased at cost items. Mostly because no one spends ALL of their adventuring reward crafting. But I dont think I would be overly strict about it.
Colin Wyers:
There are no XP costs in PFRPG, paizo removed those, and most other affects that can possibly make you 'de-level' your character.
There are no XP requirements so that shouldn't play into it.
2nd I told the DM I would be willing to craft an item for each PC. Our background story is that we are the last 4 survivors of a destroyed village and our quest is to track down the great evil/monsters/outsiders that pillaged our homeland. As Druid, I was the town wiseman/crop-guide etc. and the items I craft for each PC (using their gold of course) serves as a "gift"/reward/thank you etc. that I might have bestowed/given them in the past
|
|
There are no XP requirements so that shouldn't play into it.
2nd I told the DM I would be willing to craft an item for each PC. Our background story is that we are the last 4 survivors of a destroyed village and our quest is to track down the great evil/monsters/outsiders that pillaged our homeland. As Druid, I was the town wiseman/crop-guide etc. and the items I craft for each PC (using their gold of course) serves as a "gift"/reward/thank you etc. that I might have bestowed/given them in the past
I like that, I think it is really cool.
This in no way helps you: If you were my player I would totally let you do this.
I am a cruel DM when it comes to starting wealth, ability scores, etc. I want every player to start with the same power level of equipment - usually not much.
I think saying "I took this feat, so I can start with more", is flawed logic. The fighter could reason that while you were at home crafting with your feat, he could be out power attacking monsters and end up with the same amount of treasure. I also don't understand the logic of saying that you are not as powerful as a caster who took a different feat. If you take craft staff at 12th level (or craft wand at 12th level) you are not somehow an inferior character because you haven't had the opportunity to use the feat yet. Many feats are situational, and may or may not get used for a level or two.
With all that said, crafting magic items for the whole party just raises the overall party power a small amount. Not a big deal, but probably counter to what you want to accomplish. If you want your items to be effective and appreciated by the other players, let everyone start out with standard equipment, and see how hard magic items are to come by. When you bust out sweet new items for each player, they will make a difference in the game, not just raise an artificial starting bar. Also, you can tailor them to the campaign. A player won't turn down a +2 sword, but they will go crazy for a +1 Evil Outsider bane sword if you are taking on a kingdom of devils and demons.
There's nothing wrong at all with pre-game crafting. After all, you're investing the feats, the skills, the funds. The return is superior gear. To bar a character who's heavily invested in crafting from performing pregame crafting is on the same order as telling the Fighter she's not allowed to start with a weapon.
I had a couple players once who were playing dwarven brothers and master smiths. A Crusader and a Cleric, one took Mercantile Background, which gives you +300g, the other took an Artisan feat for -25% gold costs when crafting. They pooled their resources and skills and perfectly legally had the Crusader starting out in masterwork full plate with a masterwork dwarven waraxe. They invested nearly all their skill points, a couple feats, and most of their funds to do it. This gave them a significant edge at level 1, granted, but it didn't remotely break the game. And if a character is supposed to be The Master Smith, I expect them to have gear of exceptional quality anyways.
Pre-game crafting at higher levels is no different. You have the abilities, there's nothing wrong with using 'em.
Mostly because no one spends ALL of their adventuring reward crafting.
You've never met one of my Artificers.
In order to create magic items yourself you have to expend feat slots. In other words, you are less powerful (in some regards) than a similar spellcaster who took, say, a metamagic feat instead.
What balances this is that you are expected to have more (and better) magical items than a spellcaster who used that feat for something else. The costs are not LOWER, they are DIFFERENT.
I agree. Emphasize that you are using your feat slots for this, instead of for something else.
I would allow it, particularly with the neat backstory you describe.
Many gms would allow it some wont. Personally I do with the limitation that I also provide a limit on the craft time pcs were able to invest in their craft feats. This way they get immediate benefit from the feat without risking them to exponentially increase their wealth beyond that of the rest of the party.
All you can do is ask, if he says no suggest a craft time limit and see if he still says no.
The wealth guidelines are pretty simple. You have this value in stuff and only a given percentage should be in any one item.
I would allow you to make whatever you could logically, so long as you paid the production cost. I'd probably also insist you kept within the purchase price for the sake of the wealth table and then give you the gold as portable wealth. Basically it would be profit on hand.
So you'd pay full price for the items and then get back half in cash.
Sigurd
Given your backstory I'd expand that to the party to represent both your work and what could be salvaged\repaired from the village.
You'd start with good items _and_ some cash but you wouldn't have anything outside of the table guidlines.
I am a cruel DM when it comes to starting wealth, ability scores, etc. I want every player to start with the same power level of equipment - usually not much.
I think saying "I took this feat, so I can start with more", is flawed logic. The fighter could reason that while you were at home crafting with your feat, he could be out power attacking monsters and end up with the same amount of treasure. I also don't understand the logic of saying that you are not as powerful as a caster who took a different feat. If you take craft staff at 12th level (or craft wand at 12th level) you are not somehow an inferior character because you haven't had the opportunity to use the feat yet. Many feats are situational, and may or may not get used for a level or two.
This comes back to a discussion of downtime. The game system assumes you do not spend every day adventuring. 3 encounters per day every day and you would hit epic levels in your 20's. Not to mention, rationally human beings need rest from battle. So I dont think its fair to say the fighter could have been out fighting monsters while the wizard was crafting. In reality he was probably training, or perhaps dealing with personal buisiness in town.
As for using the feat, while it is true feats are situational, crafting feats are far more so. You need LOTS of time to use them, where as even a situational combat feat you only need the circumstance to appear for a short while to use. The fighter immediately gains the benefit of power attack or weapon focus, the wizard on the other hand would have to wait a long time before he can see the benefit of craft x.
"To bar a character who's heavily invested in crafting from performing pregame crafting is on the same order as telling the Fighter she's not allowed to start with a weapon."
With all due respect, I just don't understand this line of thinking. Why should ANYONE get to do things before the rest of the group? If the caster can craft, why can't the rogue steal? Why can't the fighter battle in the arena? Why can't the Bard perform for money?
Starting wealth is not a measure of what you can produce or earn. It is an arbitrary amount based on what it takes to have each class equipped so they are equally effective on day 1 of the adventure. There is absolutely no reason feat or skill selection should make allow one character to somehow change these starting values.
At higher levels this becomes a total game breaker. A 15th level wizard with a handful of easily had crafting feats is going to have ~100,000 more gp worth of starting equipment if allowed to make his own items.
But isn't a character without crafting feats inherently better then one with? Not really. Many feats are not used for days or weeks at a time. I would say that about half the feats on the list are used LESS then the item creation feats. Does the guy who takes Diehard deserve to start with more gold because he may not use his feat in the first level of play?
Edit: True, downtime is a big factor, and all of this can vary based on DM and campaign setting. However, scribe scroll, craft wand, and even craft misc item will probably be used more then most metamagic feats, skill or save boosting feats, or even situational combat feats like combat reflexes or whirlwind attack.
It doesn't sound cheesy to me, and I'm a notoriously stingy DM hehe.
What would be cheesy is the following...
Player: Gimme my starting gold, DM!
DM: Okay, here you go (hands over x,000 gold to player)
Player: Okay, now I have spent all of my gold making items x, y, and z and now I'm going to sell them! Gimme my gold, DM!
DM: You're kidding, right?
Player: Nope, and since I have another 4 weeks of downtime before we get started, I'm going to do this again and again until I'm rich, rich, rich!
DM: *sighs and wanders away*
Due to the time involved, virtually all crafting feats only come in to play during out-of-game time, i.e., "between adventures." Whether that out-of-game time is before the adventure begins or shoe-horned into a weeks-long "shore leave" in town doesn't really matter -- except that it allows the PC with crafting feats to actually use them in the adventure at hand, rather than waiting until it's over.
A first-level character I would probably bar from crafting before the adventure. After all 0 XPs means you haven't done anything that contributes to an adventuring career yet. But for higher-level characters, I certainly would rule (and have in fact done so) that some of the stuff they've done to get to where they are involved the opportunity to use the feats they've chosen.
|
It doesn't sound cheesy to me, and I'm a notoriously stingy DM hehe.
What would be cheesy is the following...
Player: Gimme my starting gold, DM!
DM: Okay, here you go (hands over x,000 gold to player)
Player: Okay, now I have spent all of my gold making items x, y, and z and now I'm going to sell them! Gimme my gold, DM!
DM: You're kidding, right?
Player: Nope, and since I have another 4 weeks of downtime before we get started, I'm going to do this again and again until I'm rich, rich, rich!
DM: *sighs and wanders away*
I'm a very generous DM, but I think I would say no. An earlier poster hit this on the head when they said the gold piece figure is not "How much gold you have made in your career to spend on items", it is the value of the gear you should have at that level. Which feat you take should not matter. Just because you made an item, dosen't mean it has less of a value. If we go along that line, why cant a rogue take skill focus appraise, and say that he bargained for all his items and got discounts. A mage could take charm person or suggestion, and say he only paid half price because he charmed the sellers into giving him a "Friend Discount". Heck the thief can have unlimited gear, because he "stole" it all. I know that is way out of proportion, but it is in the same line.
If I had a player who started a lvl 5 fighter, and didn't buy a sword with his money, I wouldn't just give him one. Is that unrealistic or unfair? Nope. Maybe he had a gambling problem, or he gave up fighting before the adventure, or, maybe it was stolen. (By the theif who wanted to start off the game with a sword, but didn't want to pay for it).Just my two cents.
yeah it's two sided coin with no clear answer. at least everyone didn't come in and say that it was cheezy.
With all due respect, I just don't understand this line of thinking. Why should ANYONE get to do things before the rest of the group? If the caster can craft, why can't the rogue steal? Why can't the fighter battle in the arena? Why can't the Bard perform for money?
Robbing someone, fighting in the arena, performing for money, all of these are interactions. Crafting is not. Crafting is a market action, same as any other. And the crafter isn't doing things before everyone else; after all, everyone else went gear shopping before the game began, which are market actions; the crafter's only investing resources in a superior ability to perform market actions and to go shopping.
Crafting has no risk of getting arrested or anything like that. Just buy some steel, lock yourself in shop, and mind your own business as you take ten on a few checks.
Starting wealth is not a measure of what you can produce or earn. It is an arbitrary amount based on what it takes to have each class equipped so they are equally effective on day 1 of the adventure. There is absolutely no reason feat or skill selection should make allow one character to somehow change these starting values.
Starting wealth is a measure of how much money you have. Starting with 1000g means you start with 1000g. If you're investing in abilities that let you make better use of that 1000g, then you should be allowed to take advantage of them. The superior gear the crafter starts with is like the +1 the Fighter gets from Weapon Focus; a return on a mechanical investment. And you're not changing the starting values; you're still starting with 1000g, you're just putting it to better use.
Telling the player bringing the dwarven smith heavily invested in Crafting skills, "Just take your weapons and armor at market price and say you crafted them," is about as valid as telling the Barbarian who's raging left and right and taking Reckless Rage for a better rage at a bigger penalty, "Well, you can say you're getting all these bonuses, and you can keep the penalties, but we'll just use your normal damage."
If someone invests in abilities that let them perform better market actions, they should be allowed to use them in the market actions phase.
At higher levels this becomes a total game breaker. A 15th level wizard with a handful of easily had crafting feats is going to have ~100,000 more gp worth of starting equipment if allowed to make his own items.
And the costs of items rise quadratically. Twice the item costs four times as much. The higher you go, the less that extra money means in the relative sense. And characters leveled normally would get the same financial benefits anyways as the crafter stops to make things. That someone invests in the 'fiscal prudence' ability line does not mean they're breaking the game.
But isn't a character without crafting feats inherently better then one with? Not really. Many feats are not used for days or weeks at a time. I would say that about half the feats on the list are used LESS then the item creation feats. Does the guy who takes Diehard deserve to start with more gold because he may not use his feat in the first level of play?
Diehard does not deal with money. Crafting does.
A character who takes the, "Function while between 0 and -9 HP," ability deserves to function while between 0 and -9 HP. A character who takes the, "Save money," ability deserves to save money.
It doesn't sound cheesy to me, and I'm a notoriously stingy DM hehe.
What would be cheesy is the following...
Player: Gimme my starting gold, DM!
DM: Okay, here you go (hands over x,000 gold to player)
Player: Okay, now I have spent all of my gold making items x, y, and z and now I'm going to sell them! Gimme my gold, DM!
DM: You're kidding, right?
Player: Nope, and since I have another 4 weeks of downtime before we get started, I'm going to do this again and again until I'm rich, rich, rich!
DM: *sighs and wanders away*
Oh, absolutely. Once you start large-scale crafting for profit, problems start cropping up. Like the homunculus sweatshop; have an Artificer make a ton of dedicated wrights, stuff 'em in a portable hole workshop, and tote 'em around, tossing in raw materials from time to time. In 3.5, poisonmaking worked ten times as fast and has cheaper raw materials if you could find 'em, so a homunculus sweatshop could yield a thousand gold a week fairly easily.
That's in the pile of "things you don't do."
I'm a very generous DM, but I think I would say no. An earlier poster hit this on the head when they said the gold piece figure is not "How much gold you have made in your career to spend on items", it is the value of the gear you should have at that level. Which feat you take should not matter. Just because you made an item, dosen't mean it has less of a value. If we go along that line, why cant a rogue take skill focus appraise, and say that he bargained for all his items and got discounts. A mage could take charm person or suggestion, and say he only paid half price because he charmed the sellers into giving him a "Friend Discount". Heck the thief can have unlimited gear, because he "stole" it all. I know that is way out of proportion, but it is in the same line.
There are no hard, fast haggling rules. In fact, there are no haggling rules in the Appraise skill at all, making the comparison pretty much absurd and utterly baseless within the rules.
There are hard, fast rules for crafting, and in fact you can do so with no checks at all. I have a +5 Craft: Weaponsmithing skill, so I can just take 10 on Craft checks to make martial weapons (DC15) at 1/3 market price. Rules are clear, no rolls required.
Dosgamer wrote:
It doesn't sound cheesy to me, and I'm a notoriously stingy DM hehe.What would be cheesy is the following...
Player: Gimme my starting gold, DM!
DM: Okay, here you go (hands over x,000 gold to player)
Player: Okay, now I have spent all of my gold making items x, y, and z and now I'm going to sell them! Gimme my gold, DM!
DM: You're kidding, right?
Player: Nope, and since I have another 4 weeks of downtime before we get started, I'm going to do this again and again until I'm rich, rich, rich!
DM: *sighs and wanders away*Oh, absolutely. Once you start large-scale crafting for profit, problems start cropping up. Like the homunculus sweatshop; have an Artificer make a ton of dedicated wrights, stuff 'em in a portable hole workshop, and tote 'em around, tossing in raw materials from time to time. In 3.5, poisonmaking worked ten times as fast and has cheaper raw materials if you could find 'em, so a homunculus sweatshop could yield a thousand gold a week fairly easily.
That's in the pile of "things you don't do."
Actually I would let the player craft to his heart's content and sell , since you craft at half price and you sell at half price, so his get rich scheme brings him back equal with his actual starting wealth. I would also let someone start with crafted gear at a lower cost, because they have invested feats in it, and that is part of their character's power level just as much as two weapon fighting or power attack. I would enforce the rules for a certain percentage on weapons, armor, and disposables, as well as knowing which items are being crafted, and possibly say no if something is unreasonable for a character of that level.
Crafting has no risk of getting arrested or anything like that. Just buy some steel, lock yourself in shop, and mind your own business as you take ten on a few checks.
Neither does using Craft, Profession, Perform, or Acrobatics to gather money.
Actually I would let the player craft to his heart's content and sell , since you craft at half price and you sell at half price, so his get rich scheme brings him back equal with his actual starting wealth.
It's one third for mundane crafting, actually. In 3.5, it's one sixth for poisons if you can secure a source. Either way, there's still a profit margin and in time, the homunculi will have a return.
Neither does using Craft, Profession, Perform, or Acrobatics to gather money.
Those are still undefined character interactions rather than market actions.
Still an undefined character interaction rather than a market action.
Incorrect. All four of those named skills are very precisely defined and two of them (Craft and Profession) are purely market actions.
Actually I would let the player craft to his heart's content and sell , since you craft at half price and you sell at half price, so his get rich scheme brings him back equal with his actual starting wealth.It's one third for mundane crafting, actually. In 3.5, it's one sixth for poisons if you can secure a source. Either way, there's still a profit margin and in time, the homunculi will have a return.
I was under the impression we were speaking about crafting magic items in this thread. I got that impression since the player had spent feats, though I suppose skill focus craft would count in that regard.
Same deal as before I would let someone craft items for personal use if they want to make an armor or weapon, etc. pre game no problem at the lower cost.
Using these things to make money no, because the starting line needs to be the same for all characters.
If you tell everyone to start with 10,000 GP then everyone has that much to do with as they please, including crafting, bar hopping, etc.
Crafting has no risk of getting arrested or anything like that. Just buy some steel, lock yourself in shop, and mind your own business as you take ten on a few checks.
Look this is simple. If he wants to do this, charge him, from his starting gold, the price of meals, shop rental and other miscellaneous expenses.
Or, depending on the item being created, just veto it. If the community is too small to support the expense (I beleive in 3.5 they had a guide as to how much GP a community could part with)
Or better yet, let him stay home and craft while everyone else adventures. I'm sure the XP gap will more than make up for it.
Batts
Incorrect. All four of those named skills are very precisely defined and two of them (Craft and Profession) are purely market actions.
You've still got the matter that all characters have 1000g to start with. That a character might have the ability to make money is irrelevant; you start with 1000g. That you can stretch 1000g farther is extremely relevant. The ability doesn't change your 1000g starting gold; it's using it. It's not a fountain of infinite money. It's an investment in a financial multiplier as one of your character's abilities.
I was under the impression we were speaking about crafting magic items in this thread. I got that impression since the player had spent feats, though I suppose skill focus craft would count in that regard.
Just the skill ranks is a valid investment. Particularly for that dwarf warrior/smith who doesn't get many skill ranks to begin with.
Same deal as before I would let someone craft items for personal use if they want to make an armor or weapon, etc. pre game no problem at the lower cost.
Using these things to make money no, because the starting line needs to be the same for all characters.
If you tell everyone to start with 10,000 GP then everyone has that much to do with as they please, including crafting, bar hopping, etc.
Agreed. (Bar obvious exceptions like Mercantile Background that explicitly grant +X gold at character creation.)
It's an investment in a financial multiplier as one of your character's abilities.
So are the skills I mentioned.
If the rogue or fighter want to take /permanent/ feat slots in order to get better gear, then I say go for it.
"the fighter can go to an arena, the rogue can go robbing" is true, but they give up nothing for that. If the fighter PC wants to say his items are from success at being a gladiator and rogue's gear is from his previous days as a cat burglar then nothing is stopping them.
The Wizard/sorc/cleric/druid/whoever who is using /feats/ to get a short term legup on the amount of loot they *start with* though is really the one getting screwed. Especially in campaigns offering little to no down time.
-S
Look this is simple. If he wants to do this, charge him, from his starting gold, the price of meals, shop rental and other miscellaneous expenses.
Artisan's tools cost 5g. Period. What's more, you're not charging anyone else for having eaten food or lived in homes all their lives. You're not charging the farmer Fighter for the homestead. You're not charging the Rogue for her pocket lint, or inn fare a month prior. To do what you're suggesting, having the character pay all these fees for things that happened before the game even began, is a baseless middle finger to that player and flat bad DMing.
So are the skills I mentioned.
Starting gold is still 1000g. That you have the ability to make an income does not change the fact that starting gold is 1000g. If you can make 5g/week, you start with 1000g. If you can make 100g/week, you start with 1000g. However if you can stretch that 1000g farther, you get to stretch that 1000g farther. If you can make masterwork full plate for 550g, that's not changing starting gold one whit. You're still starting with 1000g, you're just using it better.
Starting gold is still 1000g. That you have the ability to make an income does not change the fact that starting gold is 1000g. If you can make 5g/week, you start with 1000g. If you can make 100g/week, you start with 1000g. However if you can stretch that 1000g farther, you get to stretch that 1000g farther. If you can make masterwork full plate for 550g, that's not changing starting gold one whit. You're still starting with 1000g, you're just using it better.
Incorrect. You're starting with 1000g worth of items, not 1000g. In fact, no more than 10% of your wealth by level is supposed to be available funds.
|
|
There are no XP requirements so that shouldn't play into it.
2nd I told the DM I would be willing to craft an item for each PC. Our background story is that we are the last 4 survivors of a destroyed village and our quest is to track down the great evil/monsters/outsiders that pillaged our homeland. As Druid, I was the town wiseman/crop-guide etc. and the items I craft for each PC (using their gold of course) serves as a "gift"/reward/thank you etc. that I might have bestowed/given them in the past
Can I just point out that all of the "what ifs" that have made this thread drift a little don't really address the OPs situation?
This isn't some guy sitting around with homonculi and wraiths asking for a million gold pieces. This is a guy trying to slightly buff his part with a little rainbows and sunshine added in. They are all paying. They all know each other. Hell, their entire town got killed. So what, the druid crafted for a few days while the rest of the group buried the dead...this is deep PC/Party characterization, this isn't a munchkin play to eek out a few benies...context, people, context.
Incorrect. You're starting with 1000g worth of items, not 1000g. In fact, no more than 10% of your wealth by level is supposed to be available funds.
And to you, because you have that +10 Craft: Armorsmithing skill, the worth of masterwork full plate is 550g. Not 1650g. Because you can make it yourself.
|
|
Starting gold is still 1000g. That you have the ability to make an income does not change the fact that starting gold is 1000g. If you can make 5g/week, you start with 1000g. If you can make 100g/week, you start with 1000g. However if you can stretch that 1000g farther, you get to stretch that 1000g farther. If you can make masterwork full plate for 550g, that's not changing starting gold one whit. You're still starting with 1000g, you're just using it better.Incorrect. You're starting with 1000g worth of items, not 1000g. In fact, no more than 10% of your wealth by level is supposed to be available funds.
Now THIS is true and were I in a position where a party was trying to ramrod the game with a bunch of "well I worked in a workshop for eighty days and have X amount of stuff because I once had so much gold pieces once", then I also would throttle it in.
But like I said, OP isn't doing that. All of these things have context that is why we don't allow a computer to say "011010010001001" and pump out a response. I am honestly shocked how many people get caught up in the "ifs" "ands" or "buts" of this sorta stuff.
|
|
I would allow it but I would restrict your items to items that are affordable to someone with that amount of starting gold and no feats. So no individual items can have a full value of more than a certain percentage of the starting gold. Usually I use 1/2 the starting gold as my per item cap. It makes players spread the wealth a bit and prevents the "look upon my poor ragged self as I hack thee down with mine Holy Avenger sword" type of dude that dumps all the money into one item.
Incorrect. You're starting with 1000g worth of items, not 1000g. In fact, no more than 10% of your wealth by level is supposed to be available funds.And to you, because you have that +10 Craft: Armorsmithing skill, the worth of masterwork full plate is 550g. Not 1650g. Because you can make it yourself.
Incorrect. The value of the item is clearly defined by the core rules, and that value is 1650g.
Remember, the wealth represents heirlooms, found treasure, gifts from friends, and so on, not riches. It's not intended for one character to be able to take a single feat and start with double the wealth by level. To say that you can use crafting feats before the game starts implies that your character received no heirlooms, no gifts, found no magical items in treasure, only pure $$$. It breaks a base assumption of the game.
I'm a very generous DM, but I think I would say no. An earlier poster hit this on the head when they said the gold piece figure is not "How much gold you have made in your career to spend on items", it is the value of the gear you should have at that level. Which feat you take should not matter.
This is pretty much how I feel also. Your starting wealth is GP value of the items you start with and the price you pay is the same regardless of what feats you have.
|
|
I would allow it but I would restrict your items to items that are affordable to someone with that amount of starting gold and no feats. So no individual items can have a full value of more than a certain percentage of the starting gold. Usually I use 1/2 the starting gold as my per item cap. It makes players spread the wealth a bit and prevents the "look upon my poor ragged self as I hack thee down with mine Holy Avenger sword" type of dude that dumps all the money into one item.
Exactly that is a blatant attempt to game which is considerably different then some of these other scenarios.
Thumbs up Fake Healer
|
|
I'm a very generous DM, but I think I would say no. An earlier poster hit this on the head when they said the gold piece figure is not "How much gold you have made in your career to spend on items", it is the value of the gear you should have at that level. Which feat you take should not matter.This is pretty much how I feel also. Your starting wealth is GP value of the items you start with and the price you pay is the same regardless of what feats you have.
Oh something didn't click but it does now...if you feel this way, and obviously there are a couple of people and that is cool, then the OP in this case (and his party) should designate which of their paid for items were made by the druid, yeah?
Oh something didn't click but it does now...if you feel this way, and obviously there are a couple of people and that is cool, then the OP in this case (and his party) should designate which of their paid for items were made by the druid, yeah?
I'm not sure why this is relevant. The sum of the "Price" of all the items the character is to start with must be less than the wealth per level. Regardless of class, race, skills, or feat selection.
Basically players cannot benefit from class features before game play begins.
Other things I don't allow:
"My 3rd level elf bard spent the last 200 years hustling cards and entertaining and earned 5000GP."
"My rogue earns 500gp/ week picking pockets."
|
|
I'm a very generous DM, but I think I would say no. An earlier poster hit this on the head when they said the gold piece figure is not "How much gold you have made in your career to spend on items", it is the value of the gear you should have at that level. Which feat you take should not matter.
Oh something didn't click but it does now...if you feel this way, and obviously there are a couple of people and that is cool, then the OP in this case (and his party) should designate which of their paid for items were made by the druid, yeah?
So the druid took a feat that if he took it at 1st level, he could have used to more efficiently use party funds and craft items for the next 5 levels but because he supposedly "pops" into existence at 6th level he can't use that feat? Supposedly the fighter used his feats to survive until 6th level but the Druid isn't allowed to use his to survive to 6th level?
That to me is bunk. The wizard can't have a bonded item at start either then and especially can't enhance it. Effectively, if the Druid took this feat at first level, the DM would be deciding that it is only good for the remaining 2/3rds of the Druids career. "Hey fighter, somehow you survived by not using Power Attack and Cleave until 6th level" is ridiculous. "Nope, I got Improved Familiar but I wasn't able to use it until after I hit 6th level." says the Wizard "still got this crappy toad, but I plan on getting a cool-assed Celestial Hawk.....soon..."