I hear yah. The issue is that some people don't think it IS fair and just. *shrug* I got no hard feelings about it, I am running a group with no crafters at all and I think I had one in 15 years, so there is certainly no need for me to worry about the just/fair/equal/inequal thing and I honestly will present both arguments of it comes up in my group...besides I am more scared of your other crafting ideas (wraith's as crafting slaves? man I hope no one I play with ever reads the thread. : - ) )
Eberron has dedicated wrights, little minions for Artificers that can craft on their behalf. They could spend the time doing magical crafting for you, but you still have to make the XP payment, which is unprofitable if you don't want it slowing you down. For mundane, their modifiers are on the low side and of course mundane crafting is slow, but if you can secure a source for poison ingredients, poisonmaking is special; it measure progress in gp instead of sp, and it has a base of 1/6 market (again, if you get an ingredient source), which can come out to... about 120g per week. 210 with Mercantile Background. If you have the time, you can pretty much make a homunculus sweatshop and shove it into your portable hole as a money factory.
*Does not encourage such behavior.*
Is there really a Wall of Salt spell? I mean aside from what you are talking about why would a wizard craft a spell to summon a wall of salt? What benefit does that provide?
Edit: Oh I found it. Sandstorm, right? Heh. Wall of Salt. Slug monsters beware!
That's the one. Its function is pretty much that of a lower-level, weaker version of Wall of Stone.
|
I hear yah. The issue is that some people don't think it IS fair and just. *shrug* I got no hard feelings about it, I am running a group with no crafters at all and I think I had one in 15 years, so there is certainly no need for me to worry about the just/fair/equal/inequal thing and I honestly will present both arguments of it comes up in my group...besides I am more scared of your other crafting ideas (wraith's as crafting slaves? man I hope no one I play with ever reads the thread. : - ) )Eberron has dedicated wrights, little minions for Artificers that can craft on their behalf. They could spend the time doing magical crafting for you, but you still have to make the XP payment, which is unprofitable if you don't want it slowing you down. For mundane, their modifiers are on the low side and of course mundane crafting is slow, but if you can secure a source for poison ingredients, poisonmaking is special; it measure progress in gp instead of sp, and it has a base of 1/6 market (again, if you get an ingredient source), which can come out to... about 120g per week. 210 with Mercantile Background. If you have the time, you can pretty much make a homunculus sweatshop and shove it into your portable hole as a money factory.
*Does not encourage such behavior.*
Oh wrights, not wraiths (why did I think wraiths? *looks at VV's post* Nope no wraith's there...*sigh* I need to learn to pay attention.) Regardless that is a funny chain of tricks.
It's weird because Eberron did such a great job, in my mind, of accounting for a more realistic magical economy but there were still little things like what you are talking about that still don't quite jive. Although in the case of Eberron that sorta cash is not that big of a deal but still, it is sorta silly.
I would like to point out again, there is a PFRPG adventure module/module setting book that has a trait that actually gives the starting PC several hundred gold. As a trait available at 1st level, not a feat, but a trait (or 1/2 feat as they refer to it when they were saying what the design goal was for traits). So I have to say that Paizo has already given precendent for ignoring the wealth guideline in their own material.
It is helpful to me that Paizo may not think it is a big deal, I mean it is honestly is good to know, but it doesn't dissuade in my mind that the core book is unclear and something from an additional Paizo module/path isn't really something present in a game that doesn't run in Golarion and may be balanced against other factors within that world.
Just to point this out, that while the trait system was first introduced in the Curse of the Crimson Throne Player's Guide, with the release of the PFRPG book the traits were redone and expanded and released as a web enhancement to the new rules. When this was done, traits became setting-neutral and not just for Golarian.
And the trait Skylancer4 is talking about is called Rich Parents. If a starting character takes this trait, his starting cash is increased to 900 gp instead of whatever his class would normally have. Now think of the crafting a 1st level character could do with that much starting gold.
So, all this argument about "It's not fair if they can't craft willy-nilly and make a massive/modest sum! It wastes the feat!" Well, Dodge is a similarly poor choice.Since when is the warrior/smith making herself a weapon, a shield, and a suit of armor, possibly never to use his skill-based crafting again with any real relevance to the game, "Crafting willy-nilly?"
I like the phrase willy-nilly.
The willy-nilly refers to doing stuff pre-game, outside the constraints of time. Its not about the sheer amount of crafting being done - that's why I put a 'massive/modest' qualifier in there, as some examples were modest, others were massive, and I'm not doing the maths.
Plus, I stuck in a YMMV comment too, as depending on when that smith gets his martial equipment, that might qualify as 'massive', as extra AC and damage early on can make a huge difference to survivability until such levels everyone has magical equpment.
That's when he stops using his skill-based crafting, probably, and stops putting points in it - much like rogues might no longer bother with open lock after a certain point (chime of opening or knock - something like that).
Hope that makes things clearer.
I take it the rest of my idea held water? Or didn't leak too much at least! :-)
|
Since when is the warrior/smith making herself a weapon, a shield, and a suit of armor, possibly never to use his skill-based crafting again with any real relevance to the game, "Crafting willy-nilly?"
The willy-nilly refers to doing stuff pre-game, outside the constraints of time. Its not about the sheer amount of crafting being done - that's why I put a 'massive/modest' qualifier in there, as some examples were modest, others were massive, and I'm not doing the maths.
Isn't that the sticking point, though?
How much pre-game crafting is too much?What's needed is a standard assumption, of how much is a fair amount of profit to start with, when making a PC of level 2+.
That way, you can take a PC to a con event, or another DM's game, without having to waste time debating the issue, and without the player feeling they've wasted feats and skills, or the DM feeling they're being taken for a mug.
A PC with craft feats should have more gear, but it needs to be a sensible amount, since not every gp of wealth is going to be used for crafting. A typical haul of loot consists of the folllowing:
Items you want to keep: count as full value. You aren't going to sell or dismantle a headband +2, to get the materials to craft an identical headband +2, are you?
Items you want to sell: count as full value. You're cherry-picking your equipment when making the PC, so you're already assumed to have sold them for half value, then crafted what you actually want, for half price. No net gain.
Gold/gems/jewellery/trade goods: These keep their value when traded, so whatever you craft from this portion of the haul, you get double value.
So, the only thing we need to consider, is what percentage of the PC's treasure, prior to PC generation, fell into that third category?
That's the maximum profit they'd gain, assuming they had the time and ability to do so (possibly not, sometimes they'd be on a tight timescale, and need to buy something right now. They also may not have chosen the crafting feat/skill at level 1, thus spending full price on all their gear up to the point they were qualified to make their own).
So, how much pre-game profit is too much?
Where is each DM's tipping point?
+100%? (Most seem to say Hell, No!)
+50%? (Still seems unlikely)
+25%? (Maybe...)
+10%? (Is that really such a big deal?)
+5%? (Player thinks 'Why did I bother?')
+0%? (Player thinks '<censored>')
I suspect that a lot of the resistance to pre-game crafting is from DMs, worried that if they give any player an inch, they'll all take a mile.
If he lets his reasonable player make so much as a set of tin spoons, 'that guy' will demand that the whole party would have started with +100% gear.
Better, in their opinion, to veto the whole thing, than risk one member of the group abusing their trust (which seems like a deeper issue in the group, which needs thrashing out, IMHO).
There whole difference I see is what happens in practice. That's why the YMMV is there.
Theoretical analysis. The ugly big brother of "What if.."
Wow, 6 pages of 4 people repeating themselves. Yikes.
I have a theory(not right, maybe not wrong, just a theory), I look at character creation like this:
When I create a character, I think of them as a ball of clay, a pitcher of water, or any other formless metaphor you wish to think of one as. Let's use the pitcher of water as an example.
The water represents the whole of what is to become your character. Whatever you invest in(feats, skills, gear, etc) uses up some of the water. Let's say Player 1 decides to invest in making their character a melee fighter type. This player chooses the skills, feats, and class levels necessary to make this character the fighter they want.
Now, Player 2 wants to make a fighter type, but wishes to craft all their own gear. Given the players have access to the same books, builds, and info, Player 2's fighter will never be as focused, or arguably as effective in pure combat as Player 1's fighter. Player 2 used up some of their "water" to invest in being able to craft. You can argue that by crafting they are putting some "water" back in the form of gold, but they really aren't. The skill ranks are spent. The feats are spent. Player 2 chose to degrade their character's fighting ability to gain more in material possessions. Player 1 now has more effective in game skills and feats to work with, but less in gear.
If a player chooses to invest some of their character's potential into crafting and making money, or simply making and enchanting their gear before the game, they should rightfully start with more gear and money. I would be even more upset if I, as a player, invested into my character's backstory to craft and make money, and ended up starting with the same amount of money as the Half-Orc with 7 INT and no job skills whatsoever.
They paid the skills ranks, feats, time, and imagination, they should get more. This is just my opinion. You can micro-manage microscopic increments til we're all blue in the face(like the past 4 pages), but look where it got us. You spend the time, you spend the resources(skill ranks and feats), you get the payoff. If Player 1 chose not to do any of that, and just buy everything at face value, that was his/her decision.
EDIT: At the end of the day, it's the DM's discretion. As a DM, I have never had a problem with this scenario. Other DM's have. If a player is purposely trying to exploit the game and somehow start with infinite gold, the DM needs to step in and put a stop to it. Let's leave it at that.
|
|
I would like to point out again, there is a PFRPG adventure module/module setting book that has a trait that actually gives the starting PC several hundred gold. As a trait available at 1st level, not a feat, but a trait (or 1/2 feat as they refer to it when they were saying what the design goal was for traits). So I have to say that Paizo has already given precendent for ignoring the wealth guideline in their own material.It is helpful to me that Paizo may not think it is a big deal, I mean it is honestly is good to know, but it doesn't dissuade in my mind that the core book is unclear and something from an additional Paizo module/path isn't really something present in a game that doesn't run in Golarion and may be balanced against other factors within that world.Just to point this out, that while the trait system was first introduced in the Curse of the Crimson Throne Player's Guide, with the release of the PFRPG book the traits were redone and expanded and released as a web enhancement to the new rules. When this was done, traits became setting-neutral and not just for Golarian.
And the trait Skylancer4 is talking about is called Rich Parents. If a starting character takes this trait, his starting cash is increased to 900 gp instead of whatever his class would normally have. Now think of the crafting a 1st level character could do with that much starting gold.
Did not know that, good to know.
Still, the traits aren't in the main book so I probably won't throw them at my players for now. But I will definitely track down that web enhancement and take a look. Thanks.
Wow, 6 pages of 4 people repeating themselves. Yikes.
Then you come along and post essentially what several other people have posted...
If a player chooses to invest some of their character's potential into crafting and making money, or simply making and enchanting their gear before the game, they should rightfully start with more gear and money. I would be even more upset if I, as a player, invested into my character's backstory to craft and make money, and ended up starting with the same amount of money as the Half-Orc with 7 INT and no job skills whatsoever.
Without any guidelines in the rules the question is HOW MUCH? How much monetarily is a feat worth? How much is a skill point worth?
The thing is very few players take these skills in game and when they do they rarely benefit vastly over their non-crafty counterparts. If characters benefit from crafting prior to the game start shouldn't they also get a similar wealth boosting during normal game play? Ultimately this makes skills which are worth more prior to game play than ones who use the talents on an ongoing campaign.
Plus, I stuck in a YMMV comment too, as depending on when that smith gets his martial equipment, that might qualify as 'massive', as extra AC and damage early on can make a huge difference to survivability until such levels everyone has magical equpment.
Except even at its zenith, it's only +2 AC for the span of about a level or two. That may be nice, but it's temporary and it's not about to eclipse anyone. To call it "massive" is plain silly. At best, it's 'appropriate' when you're going up against foes against whom that +2 AC is particularly effective, but that's just a niche.
And Dodge may not be the best choice, but when you take it, you get that +1 AC bonus. When you take crafting skills, you ought to get that temporary gear boost.
That's when he stops using his skill-based crafting, probably, and stops putting points in it - much like rogues might no longer bother with open lock after a certain point (chime of opening or knock - something like that).
And that is not a bad thing. After all, there's nothing wrong with someone who only wants to use wands through UMD who stops taking ranks in it once she can use wands reliably.
Mundane crafting stops being an advantage past the earliest levels unless the character goes the Magical Craftsman route. Therefore, the character stops investing in it past the earliest levels. The skill ranks are still bogged down in those old craft skills.
A PC with craft feats should have more gear, but it needs to be a sensible amount, since not every gp of wealth is going to be used for crafting. A typical haul of loot consists of the folllowing:
Items you want to keep: count as full value. You aren't going to sell or dismantle a headband +2, to get the materials to craft an identical headband +2, are you?
Items you want to sell: count as full value. You're cherry-picking your equipment when making the PC, so you're already assumed to have sold them for half value, then crafted what you actually want, for half price. No net gain.
Actually, the typical haul consists of items you want to sell now, items you want to sell later, and items you will consume.
The typical adventuring party is going to sell that +2 headband. Just not necessarily right away. They may use it for five levels first, then sell it, but in the end, it's all the same, and in the end, all those proceeds can be rolled into crafting if a character has the feats to create everything the party may need.
But for most crafters? This is a discount on the stuff they can actually make, they can't make everything, and still need stuff they can't make. An issue that's constantly being ignored as folks rail against crafters making everything they own.
So, how much pre-game profit is too much?
Where is each DM's tipping point?
+100%? (Most seem to say Hell, No!)
+50%? (Still seems unlikely)
+25%? (Maybe...)
+10%? (Is that really such a big deal?)
+5%? (Player thinks 'Why did I bother?')
+0%? (Player thinks '<censored>')
Mind that not all profit is created equal.
If you have a level 1 Monk starting with the Rich Parents trait, that Monk's getting a 2,471% increase in starting wealth. And it doesn't matter. It's no big deal. It's still only 900g. That only goes so far, and it will be eclipsed by the party's earnings in short order.
Going to the faulty value-based mode, a 150% gear boost at level 2 doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot in the long run. And if you have a 100% gear value boost, but all you have is wands, that's not an unfair advantage. After all, you only have wands. That's a big weakness, and your other bases aren't covered. It's just that you're getting wands on the cheap and can now afford to use them in ways others can't.
Obviously me statement here has been misunderstood. I am refering to total wealth, not an incremental increase.
If a crafter crafts magic items out of all their WBL, they end up with 200% total of their WBL worth in items (ex 1000 vs 2000, 2k is 200% of 1k)
If a crafter crafts mundane items out of all their WBL, they end up with 300% total of their WBL worth in items (ex 1000 vs 3000, 3k is 300% of 1k)
Chief. Normal profits ain't in the +100-200% range. Most characters can't make all their stuff. And past the earliest levels, the sorts of things you can make with mundane crafting become irrelevant.
If the game starts at level 2, with 1,000g starting gold, The Master Smith makes a 2485g market masterwork gear suite for 938.33g. +150%
If the game starts at level 3, with 3,000g starting gold, The Master Smith makes a 2485g market masterwork gear suite for 938.33g. +50%.
If the game starts at level 4, with 6,000g starting gold, The Master Smith makes a 2485g market masterwork gear suite for 938.33g. +25%.
If the game starts at level 5, with 10,500g starting gold, The Master Smith makes a 2485g market masterwork gear suite for 938.33g. +15%.
Until The Master Smith can start making adamantine stuff, the savings don't grow. That percentage shrinks every level until it becomes irrelevant. There isn't anything else that could possibly be truly useful that The Master Smith could possibly make. Does that look like +200% wealth at level 5? And this is very near the absolute zenith of useful mundane crafting.
Count that again in TOTAL worth. Starting with 1000gp and ending up with 2546gp means you are starting with 254.6% of your WBL. Check that math and see. THAT is my problem with your position: Even with magic items, you can easily reach 150% - 175% of your WBL, which means you start as one of the most powerful characters, beyond those guys that took dodge or weapon focus, and you can do it with minimal opportunity cost or game interraction.
Again. That's the absolute extreme. And my math was correct. I'm talking bonus.
However, at this point, that +154% does not matter. It's at such a low level that it cannot do anything except get that temporary +2 AC. At higher levels, the savings do not grow. It cannot get you anything else of meaning except an adamantine weapon and some special metal armor, if you get a year off, and never see use again.
A big number does not mean broken. +154% at level 2 only in regard to mundane arms and armor is not a huge advantage, and it does not last. Pure percentages don't matter. It's the meaning behind those percentages that matter.
As for the +50-75%? That's a +20% boost in item effectiveness, likely, stemming from at least two feats, only regarding the specific items you're taking the crafting feats for. And you might not be able to get the time after the game starts to maintain that edge. And odds are one of those feats is Craft Wondrous Item if you're getting +50-75%, which is an independent issue unrelated to crafting as a whole.
Where did you get that idea from? David and Maus start with gear worth more than their WBL due to using their skills/abilities.
Bjorn and Craftysmallblueperson start with gear worth more than their WBL due to using their skills/abilities.
David and Maus made an income and thus spent more than WBL, meaning they exceeded the budget.
Bjorn and Craftysmallblueperson spent WBL and not a penny more, meaning they did not exceed the budget.
Why does one get to do that and not the other? This is NOT a trivial question. YOU are playing Maus and did NOT take any crafting skills. Craftysmallblueperson shows up only having put skills into mundane crafting, and starts with 2546gp worth of gear, which he apparently spent the last 62 WEEKS crafting. You, naturally, ask yourself "What have I been doing these last 62 weeks that I can't start with a little more cash?"
And you are right to ask that question. Crafting 3:16 says "Because VV said so!"??
Please give the reason Maus did not get the option of doing something for the last 62 weeks and Craftysmallblueperson did.
I've told you. Repeatedly. All of them only have a thousand gold to spend. That starting gold is set at a thousand. Not more, not less. Everyone has every right to do whatever they please before game, to use their abilities however they please, but starting gold is one thousand gold, and they are not allowed to spend a penny more. However, making an income is not a valid pregame action because starting wealth is set.
Both Maus and Craftysmallblueperson got 1,000g. They were both told they get only 1,000g. They both spent 1,000g. There is no inequity. If Maus then goes and demands more than 1,000g to spend, that is a violation of the stated terms of the game, because everyone has 1,000g to spend. No more, no less. To get worked up over that income-making ability not being allowed when spending money is locked is to rail against the stated terms of the game.
Actually no you won't. Items you sell are sold at half value. It takes at least that much to create the items you make, the RAW essentially prohibits PCs from profiting by using craft skills because they're expected to make their scratch by adventuring. That's the other problem of trying to use crafting feats to boost your starting kitty, it's against the RAW.
Again, yes, you will have more money, because everything is sold eventually. Whether you find a +1 sword and sell it right away, or find a +1 sword, use it until you find a +2 sword, and then sell the +1 sword, very nearly everything is sold eventually. In fact, that stuff is sold is a stated assumption of WBL.
Once you sell stuff, the proceeds are subsequently used to acquire more stuff, be it by purchases at market or by crafting. If you're crafting, you're saving money, and making a profit in comparison to the baseline.
And there is absolutely no written rule against it anywhere. In fact, precedent states quite the opposite. The 3.5 DMG, Rich Parents, the nature of crafting feats and skills themselves, any number of things that allow you to advance in wealth.
Great. Ogre ninjas. Just what we need.
*Once threw a Ninja moose at the party.*
Do I even want to know how that works?
*Shrug.* Intelligent animals with class levels. This moose just happened to take levels in Ninja. There was also a bear Barbarian and an owl Druid.
Edit: Can anyone link me to the trait download Enevhar Aldarion mentioned? I can't seem to find it for the life of me...
By Googling "Pathfinder character traits web enhancement," I found this. Alternately, it's on the SRD.
|
|
Do I even want to know how that works?*Shrug.* Intelligent animals with class levels. This moose just happened to take levels in Ninja. There was also a bear Barbarian and an owl Druid.
That is all very sick and wrong. *shakes head*
Edit: Can anyone link me to the trait download Enevhar Aldarion mentioned? I can't seem to find it for the life of me...By Googling "Pathfinder character traits web enhancement," I found this. Alternately, it's on the SRD.
Oh sure, do it the easy way. Thanks VV
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
There's this:
You can practice your trade and make a decent living, earning about half your check result in gold pieces per week of dedicated work. You know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the craft’s daily tasks, how to supervise untrained helpers, and how to handle common problems. (Untrained laborers and assistants earn an average of 1 silver piece per day.)
Yet another way to handle pregame crafting would be to just allow crafters a roll for gp for each week of pre-game time, then charge all equipment at full price and assume that the extra gp covers equipment the crafter made for himself.
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.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
You're getting value for the craft skills as well though, if the GM wanted to be a stickler, he could make you actually ROLL for the creation of the items.
Hey, if were talking about 5th level, it’s even easier:
Wizard starts with Craft Wand. 10,500 to start. Please note I JUST picked up this feat:
Lets see, I think I want 4 2nd level wands. How about Invisibility, Minor Image, Glitterdust, and Fox’s Cunning. At 4.5k each, ½ price, that’s 9k total spent. I have an amulet as an arcane bond, so let’s make it Nat Armor +1 for only 1k. Up to 10k already? Hmm, well, I’m an elf, and I have the bowmaking skill, and I have a 10 str (14 after spell), so I’ll make myself a MW StrBow (14) for another 200. That leaves 300 for other items, so I’m cool.20 days making magic items, plus 15 odd weeks crafting a bow, and I’m ready! Total value of my equipment: 20,900, or 199% of WBL. One feat and one maxed skill. Did I mention I got a free 18 day vacation right after I leveled where I did not have to worry about any expenses or pesky plot points?
So your continued rebuttals and exampled fell flat entirely at level 5. Care to try again? I wager at almost ANY level I can do the same with only 1 feat that is NOT Wondrous item.
...
You do realize that character's kit sucks, right? And most of that's in expendables, fated to be expended, leaving you with nothing. You have a Wizard with absolutely no spells beyond base, whose Int-booster only works for a few minutes at a time and will eventually sputter out and turn useless, who has only one persistent magic item, a paltry +1 to AC, and let's not get into that Wand of Glitterdust's pathetic DC13 save.
Yes, market value of that kit may be high, but that doesn't mean it's any good, or that it's a huge advantage. It's like the Vow of Poverty issue. Yes, the cost to go out and buy a kit that matches Vow of Poverty would be well above WBL. Thing is, as much as it costs, the Vow of Poverty bonuses make for a bad kit with glaring weaknesses that no sane person would even want to go out and replicate. Just as this 199% WBL kit you present is so pathetic and riddled with glaring weaknesses that nobody would want to replicate that. Heck, the mage who didn't take any crafting at all and chose to buy things that are actually useful would be better off.
Just because it costs more doesn't mean it's better or that it's an advantage.
Here we go again with what people spend vs the value of what they have. Do you not see that all this creates is an easily exploitable character creation bug? Do you really want ALL characters starting above 1 having skills/feats they never really intend to use for anything other than an exploit? Because that is EXACTLY what will happen when you say “David and Maus get nothing, Bjorn and Crafty get a boost to the value of their starting equipment”.
Do you not see that Weapon Focus just opens up an AB exploit? You know that Fighter with Weapon Focus: Longsword isn't going to bother using anything else. It's just a cheat to increase AB while side-stepping the drawbacks of the feat. Do you really want ALL Fighters just picking a weapon to get +2 AB and +4 damage right out of the box?
Investing in an advantage is not an exploit. Getting the advantage you invest in does not mean it's some gamebreaking exploit. If the crafters get the opportunity to craft something useful again later, they'll craft something useful again later. If they don't, they won't. If this starting gear is the only chance they ever get to use their crafting, then it's a good thing they got their benefits from the start, otherwise they would have been completely screwed.
Though I should think that if you're investing feats into crafting, you plan to keep crafting throughout your career.
That aside, you never DID answer what Maus was doing for 62 weeks while Crafty was crafting
Hell if I know. Read the guy's backstory yourself. It's all in there. Heck, considering how long dwarves live, Maus may not have even been born yet. But ultimately, it doesn't matter whether Maus was in the imperial dungeons or living the high life of nobility or making poison or raising a griffon or barely scraping by as some petty cutpurse. He still only gets a thousand gold to spend.
Can I invest in agriculture or sea trading? What about a joint stock company? No, you say, but I say 62 weeks is more than enough time to purchase and cash in on grain futures.
Chief. Starting the game with umpteen tons of grain is, quite literally, the exact same thing as starting the game with umpteen gold coins. That ain't investment. That's like walking around with a pocket full of yen instead of dollars.
And the game doesn't even have rules for corporations, and barely has rules for business at all. Even that involves pulling on 3.5 material, and even then, the rules on the matter suck. You're saying it's not fair that someone didn't get the time to use nonrules that have nothing to do with the game at all?
I am doing what I want with MY money, but the GM says I can’t have more than 1000gp. Then crafty shows up with 2.5k in gear, and the GM wonders why I throw a fit.
Indeed. It's utterly bizarre. Crafty invested in those discounts fair and square. Your fit is as baseless and immature as if you bought your five-dollar ice cream, then I come in with a coupon book I bought and use one to get a bigger sundae for five dollars. Yes, I'm getting more out of my five dollars. I'm the one who bought the coupon book and had the forethought to bring it.
Just to reiterate, your position that everyone can do what they want with their money before the game is bunk unless you REALLY mean it, which your posts indicate you don’t.
I absolutely mean that anyone can do anything they want with their time pregame. However, starting wealth is locked. That is the sole constraint beyond story.
Therefore, nothing you do can change the money you have to spend. You can only spend that one thousand, but you are free to do whatever you please. In fact, it's very much preferred that the Wizard scribe those scrolls into her spellbook before the game starts, or acquire that improved familiar beforehand, because those just get in the way.
You're getting value for the craft skills as well though, if the GM wanted to be a stickler, he could make you actually ROLL for the creation of the items.
That's not stickling. That's screwing the player. You're allowed to take 10 on Craft checks. And Spellcraft checks, for that matter. And Handle Animal. To require rolls is utterly baseless.
Plus, I stuck in a YMMV comment too, as depending on when that smith gets his martial equipment, that might qualify as 'massive', as extra AC and damage early on can make a huge difference to survivability until such levels everyone has magical equpment.Except even at its zenith, it's only +2 AC for the span of about a level or two. That may be nice, but it's temporary and it's not about to eclipse anyone. To call it "massive" is plain silly.
Comparatively massive! Maybe? It's +2 AC that's nearly 'always on' and a result of a skill, not a feat. That's good. Arguably, that's better than good. Which is why this thread is going the way it is...
At best, it's 'appropriate' when you're going up against foes against whom that +2 AC is particularly effective, but that's just a niche.
That's an opinion. Based on your own experiences and therefore fine, but I don't think it's quite so niche...
And Dodge may not be the best choice, but when you take it, you get that +1 AC bonus.
Not all the time. It's a pretty crap feat. Some might even say 'niche' but I'm not going to. See where I'm going there?
When you take crafting skills, you ought to get that temporary gear boost.
I agree. But before game...? That's up to the DM I think...
I agree. But before game...? That's up to the DM I think...
That person with Dodge gets the AC boost before game. That person with Weapon Focus gets that AB boost before the game. This is little different, and perfectly in line with WBL and normal progression.
When you say "spend and invest in discounts" I hear "gain a financial advantage."
Yes!
Yes, you are gaining a financial advantage, every bit as much as the person taking Weapon Focus is in it for the AB bonus. You are taking the "gain financial advantage" skill and the "gain financial advantage" feat. You ought to get a financial advantage out of it.
When you say "they invested feats/skills" I hear "they went that way knowing they are trying to bypass WBL."
No.
You're not bypassing anything. You're still every bit as subject to WBL as everyone else. You still only have a thousand gold to spend. My coupon did not change the fact that I only had five dollars. I may be able to get more ice cream out of that five dollars thanks to the coupon, but it only goes so far, and if I go next door and buy a bag of candy with it instead, but don't have a coupon for the candy shop, it's still just five dollars that I have.
And if I walk into a supermarket with a coupon for half off cereal, but I need cereal, bread, milk, and eggs, I'm not getting half off my groceries. I'm getting half off cereal. If all I want is cereal, then I get half off my groceries, but that's not exactly making for a balanced diet.
When you say "its a hard 1k limit on what you can spend" I hear "people who have rules for tripling their wealth get to do so, so everyone should."
Why should everyone be able to do so?
Should the Fighter be able to rage?
Should the Ranger be able to Sneak Attack?
Should the Bard be able to cast Time Stop?
People who invest in Ability X should be able to use and gain advantage from Ability X. People who do not invest in Ability X should not be able to use Ability X.
When you say "it comes out even because everyone got the same to spend", I hear "it doesn't matter what that final value is, because it's all about the starting funds."
Bingo.
When you say "they can't gain income pre-game" I hear a whispered "except when using crafting."
No.
Crafting is not income any more than that coupon I used was currency. If I spend 550g to make masterwork full plate, I'm not getting 1100g. I'm saving 1100g. I'm still only spending 550g. And if I have 550g, I can afford to make masterwork full plate.
Income and expense are two entirely different things. Reducing expenses and earning income are two entirely different things.
And for at least the fourth time, crafters are NOT the only people who can take advantage of pregame time. The griffon rider can raise that griffon mount from an egg. The Wizard can scribe spells into her spellbook and get that improved familiar and cast those Permanency'd spells. Monks can go out and get someone to cast a permanent Magic Fang on their fists. You can assassinate someone for later use in PrC qualification.
There are many, many things you can do pregame. Crafting is only one of them.
Do you not see that Weapon Focus just opens up an AB exploit? You know that Fighter with Weapon Focus: Longsword isn't going to bother using anything else. It's just a cheat to increase AB while side-stepping the drawbacks of the feat.
These advantages we're talking about aren't even comparable. The combat feat advantages can only be gained during play while you're advocating the creation feats should generate advantages before play.
Name one the increases the value of your equipment past WBL. That is what crafting does, and I manifestly see that as violating a basic assumption of the game. Since there are no other actions that can do that, it is an exploit. It makes no difference that you used a coupon or had more cash: you benefited economically from the action. Which pre-game action grants a pure benefit that pays for itself two-threefold?
Raising your own griffon mount from an egg gets you a griffon with a market value of seven thousand gold at the price of thirty-five hundred.
And that something is unusual does not mean it's illegal. No, there are not many things that are designed to get you more, better stuff. Crafting is one of them. The game pays little attention to economics, and has few economic advantages that you can grab. That they are few does not mean that they are not intended to gain an economic advantage.
Keep in mind that WBL is an in-game measure first, and a character creation aid second. And also mind that crafting, if used as intended as you go along, will get you gear with a market value greater than WBL. It does the exact same thing in character creation as it does in game.
As for the "there are no other" argument? By the logic you present, because Step Up is the only effect in the game that allows you to react to a five-foot step with a five-foot step, you contend that using Step Up to counter a five-foot step with a five-foot step is clearly an exploit.
I say that's bunk, and that it's using Step Up as intended, just as it is using crafting as intended to get an economic advantage out of it. If you weren't supposed to get an economic advantage out of crafting, it wouldn't be in the game at all.
These advantages we're talking about aren't even comparable. The combat feat advantages can only be gained during play while you're advocating the creation feats should generate advantages before play.
The benefit of that masterwork waraxe can only be gained during play. That the crafter starts out with a masterwork waraxe is no different from the other warrior who starts out with an AB bonus. They're both not coming into the picture until they're actually used. It's just that one has an inherent AB bonus that will apply throughout his career and the other carries his AB bonus which will become completely obsolete in short order.
I agree. But before game...? That's up to the DM I think...That person with Dodge gets the AC boost before game. That person with Weapon Focus gets that AB boost before the game. This is little different, and perfectly in line with WBL and normal progression.
I'm confused. How would one effectively use an AC or AB boost before the game starts?
By the way - do you type with your mind? Those are enormous posts you put down there. I'm fearing for your keyboard!
I'm confused. How would one effectively use an AC or AB boost before the game starts?
They can't. Just as one can't effectively use a masterwork dwarven waraxe before the game starts. Until either see use, neither is an advantage. As such, either both have the advantage from the beginning, as both get the AB bonus on their sheets from the beginning, or neither does, as neither gain any benefit from their feat or weapon until they actually use it.
By the way - do you type with your mind? Those are enormous posts you put down there. I'm fearing for your keyboard!
I have an army of HD-advanced monkeys that placed their level-up attribute bonuses into intelligence and put all their ranks into Linguistics.
I'm confused. How would one effectively use an AC or AB boost before the game starts?They can't. Just as one can't effectively use a masterwork dwarven waraxe before the game starts. Until either see use, neither is an advantage. As such, either both have the advantage from the beginning, as both get the AB bonus on their sheets from the beginning, or neither does, as neither gain any benefit from their feat or weapon until they actually use it.
hmm... I think the advantage is being able to get the dwarven war-axe, not what the axe itself can do. I'm happy if you are though...
Thanks for the info about the monkeys - I'll try to get some of those :-)
getting the axe is not quite an advantage. it requires one be proficient, requires the skill investment. and a lot of other things.
for a cheaper investment, i'd rather go weapon finesse and use the dagger. i like my knives. but i play a lot of rogues. most of which are little tian girls. 5 foot nothing and 80ish pounds.
|
|
Brave fight for the net worth team
Yeah no offense to anyone involved bu this has been sort of an aggravating argument. I am lucky that I have players that are not so munchkin but I have some other friends who I intentionally avoid playing with sometimes, because they would do exactly the things you describe. Honestly that at least a couple of other people see it the way I do lets me know that I am not completely out of my mind.
I even have the components, a rust monster and barbarian sunderer. :P
Ooohh does it cleft foul barbarians in twain?
Edit: Heh. Wow. Barbarian that is sunderer, not sunderer of barbarians.
You do realize that character's kit sucks, right?
Yeah, those goalposts had no call to be where you'd previously set them anyway.
Wow, 6 pages of 4 people repeating themselves. Yikes.So your reaction to that observation is to then chime in a repeat on half of the argument? ; - p *OBVIOUS ATTEMPT AT HUMOR*
Edit: Wow. Ninja'd by da Ogre
*statement retracted for civility.* Have a nice day.
Suffice it to say, I see an obvious exploit that anyone with half a brain would use: certainly ALL of my players would jump at the chance, and they would even EXPLAIN the exploit to each other in order to maximize the party benefit. If YOUR players did that, I'm sure you would soon come to see the problem as I do, but obviously they don't, for whatever reason (including them being better behaved than mine...)
It's no more an exploit than scribing your spells beforehand or getting that improved familiar before the game starts or taking Weapon Focus for higher AB.
And my players take crafting abilities every time it's appropriate. I'm very familiar with crafting in my games. There are frequently crafters walking next to non-crafters. Sometimes the crafters share with the party. Sometimes they don't. I've seen it in action in the hands of people who really know how to play with the rules.
And ya know what? It doesn't break the game.
Very few people in my games take crafting skills besides alchemy, poisonmaking, and bowmaking, and the last is for the purpose of making their own arrows in the wilderness. The reason for this is those crafting skills you keep decrying, that Weaponsmithing, or Armorsmithing, or Bowmaking? They suck.
Armorsmithing is the most lucrative of the three, and it's only useful precisely three times in a complete adventuring career. Once at level one, for making basic armor, a usage that's skipped if you're starting above level one. Once at level two, for making masterwork armor. Once somewhere between levels six to eight, for making armor out of a special material, either mithral or adamantine. Total savings over the course of a career? A hundred, then a thousand, then seven to eleven thousand for an expense many just don't bother with anyways. That's total. Ever. From one to twenty. Assuming you can find the time to make the adamantine full plate. If you have multiple heavy armor users in the party, it goes up considerably, but even then, it's just barely worth considering. And the thing is, most folks don't particularly care about armor made of special materials; it's just something they pick up because they can when it becomes cheaper. Their effects, while expensive, just aren't very good. All this does is stand a so-so chance of getting you the adamantine full plate's DR 3/- at a level where it actually matters. Weaponsmithing and Bowmaking are strictly worse than Armorsmithing at their zenith.
This is from extensive testing from some fairly serious optimizers. Skill-based crafting sucks. Especially with Pathfinder's changes to accelerated crafting making it prohibitively time-consuming to make the adamantine full plate.
As for feat-based? The Wizards and Archivists scribe themselves a ream of scrolls, absolutely. That's what those classes do. Even without crafting, they'd get themselves a ream of scrolls. As for other crafting feats? They are serious investments considered seriously based on the needs of the party.
If the party lineup reads Fighter/Rogue/Druid/Wizard, and the Wizard is trying to choose between Alacritous Cogitation or Craft Magical Arms and Armor, it's a serious choice between two benefits. The question becomes, "How much does this party care about magic arms and armor?" In this case? Not a whole lot. The Fighter does, of course, and the Rogue can use better weapons and armor, though she's probably better off forgoing weapons almost entirely in favor of chucking acid and alchemist's fire, and the Druid doesn't really care since she's a bear all day anyways and doesn't need weapons or armor beyond the sharp, pointy teeth. So, the choice is Alacritous Cogitation, because crafting just doesn't give that big a return in this case.
Even if the party truly cares about weapons and armor and can really benefit tremendously from them, even Extend Spell can often be better. Extended Greater Magic Weapon, extended Magic Vestment. Slap 'em on something with a bunch of shiny weapon properties, and you have a super spiffy weapon pretty much all day without worries of being stuck in the wilderness without access to a proper workshop for five levels in the next mission.
When you know precisely what you get from crafting and how it truly compares to other options, it's a significant and meaningful choice to be weighed carefully. Just as every other option in the game should be.
To that end, I interpret the WBL table to be final net worth, not beginning purchasing power. If you want to craft the moon, or raise the griffon, or anything else, you better do it in-game. I read that as the RAI, and I intend to uphold that. I will make an exception for a crafter using the final 10% of their goods to craft, as that DOES seem to be a fair use, and the limits of the exploit are very small.
That "final 10%" quite explicitly goes against RAW. It states in the WBL parameters that they assume items are sold along the way, meaning crafters had a lot more to work with along the way. Also, that 10% is a suggestion, not a rule. In fact, it's not a constraint of any kind. The stifling assumption that all characters above level one have been adventurers acquiring loot by killing things and taking their stuff is not a rule, and is an utterly ludicrous requirement. It's just as valid for some snotty noble to run out with a cut of the family fortune, gear up on a literal shopping trip, and head out to a life of adventure already a level six Sorcerer before ever even seeing a monster.
If others read this differently, I wish you the best, and hope you have handy the Circle of Protection Against Munchkin spell handy at your table.
Please. Don't act like you're protecting the pure, innocent game from the terrors of the munchkin powergamers. Base application of common sense is essential for running the game at all. That you have to apply some good sense to managing crafting is not a strike against it. After all, there are plenty of holes in the game already.
A dwarven smith who has smithing skills and smiths his own weapons? That makes sense, and it's perfectly reasonable. Common sense says to allow it.
A griffon rider who, as part of her training, raises her griffon from an egg and has the skills to do so? That makes sense and is perfectly reasonable.
Some schmuck starting out with a huge pile of iron pots to sell as soon as the game starts so that he can equip himself on the bigger stack of coins? That's just plain silly.
And you keep objecting to these skill-based crafters benefiting pregame? For a lot of them, it may be the only time they can benefit. The Barbarian may get to Power Attack in every fight of his life, but The Master Smith has two chances to ever use Craft: Armorsmithing for herself, ever, and the second will depend on a convenient gap between chapters cropping up. To bar her from that chance is on par with telling the Barbarian she can't use Power Attack for the next five levels.
You do realize that character's kit sucks, right?Yeah, those goalposts had no call to be where you'd previously set them anyway.
The goal posts didn't move one whit. The assertion was that crafting makes for these unfair super kits. When someone pretty much says, "Behold, the unreasonable 199% super kit of doom and tremble," the fact that it's a crappy kit is extremely relevant. After all, for the super kit to be an advantage, it first has to be better than an ordinary kit.
Thing is, in a good set of gear, you have more than one item type. That Cleric of Moradin with Craft Magic Arms and Armor? Yes, he has shinier weapons and armor. Better arms at lower cost. But he also has a headband of wisdom, a belt of strength, a couple magic rings, and standard contingency wands and scrolls, likely costing at least as much as, if not more than, his weapons and armor. And if the Cleric of Moradin invests in the feats to make all those other things? Then he absolutely deserves to get the discount on every single one of them, since he's pouring five feats into the deal.
|
|
Wow, 6 pages of 4 people repeating themselves. Yikes.So your reaction to that observation is to then chime in a repeat on half of the argument? ; - p *OBVIOUS ATTEMPT AT HUMOR*
Edit: Wow. Ninja'd by da Ogre
*statement retracted for civility.* Have a nice day.
*Looks at bolded text*
*looks at Jandrem*
*Looks at bolded text*
*Looks at Jandrem*
Sorry if I offended you, I really was trying to joke around.
In your opinion. I disagree.
There are no more useless words in the English language. By the strictest definition, everything is an opinion. To call someone's side such is little more than obfuscation. An attempt to undermine a position by shunting both sides to the fluffy realm of "opinion," ignoring the fact that all opinions are subject to reason.
So you houseruled that you can craft pre-game. If it sucks so much to do it in game, what makes you think the character pre-game would have such as easy time doing it? You made a houserule to make crafting more useful.
Ain't a houserule, chief. In fact, it's quite explicitly legal. DMG, page 199.
As for translating to Pathfinder? You decree out of the blue that they intend for it not to be the case and that's why they left it out. Thing is, page 199 of the DMG is the "Creating PCs Above 1st Level" section, which was left out of Pathfinder entirely for the time being. To decree they left that specific clause of the section out because they disagree with it when they left the entire section out (presumably for reasons of space) is baseless and silly. Until there's official word otherwise, 3.5 precedent stands as the only real evidence on the matter. There is absolutely nothing in RAW to the contrary.
If you want to keep arguing that it's against RAW, you really don't have a leg to stand on.
Not at all. It's right there. And they DID sell off stuff and get items. I am basing the valuation on NET WORTH, and nothing else. The 10% is a very kind exception for people who invested into crafting skills.
Except WBL is quite explicitly not based on value. It is a tool for running a game first and creating a higher-level PC second.
When applied as explicitly stated, wealth by level is used to confer goodies on the party as they level up. Some of those goodies will be trade goods. Some will be magic items. Some will be expendables. Many could well be sold. Leveling up, applying WBL as intended, crafters will craft, using the coinage and proceeds from sales to make bigger, better, more valuable stuff, while non-crafters will spend their money to get less valuable goods at market. In other words, applying WBL as intended, crafters have more swag.
In other words, WBL applied as intended, in strict level up from normal adventuring from level 1 to 20 is ultimately expense based, as pretty much everything gets sold eventually for use in acquisitions. Not value based. Yes, there's a market value on the swag you're given, but it's assumed that the money is spent and the magic items are eventually sold. To then use the same standard in character creation only stands to reason.
ACTUALLY, I didn't make the build to prove anything other than:
1) 150% - 175% WBL was actually achievable
2) It can be achieved without Craft Wondrous Item, which you have an objection with
3) Multiple feats and skills are not necessary strictly necessaryThe strength or weakness of a build I spent less than 10 minutes on is irrelevant. I could tweak a battle cleric, or a poisonmaker, just the same. Throwing useful wands around was just one way to illustrate the point.
Except those premises are completely meaningless. Yes, you can make such a kit. I never denied it! In fact, I provided an example of a character making all her stuff with a single crafting feat. Quite the same example you provided; a wandsmith, spending nearly every dime on wands.
Except the wandsmith is perfectly fair. Her kit isn't any better than anyone else's, due to its tremendously constrained nature. In fact, it's a rather substantial disadvantage, as it's the bulk of starting wealth in expendables, and the standard expendable allowance for your own safety is 15%.
If all you wanted to establish was that it's possible to blow all your money on a single item type, I never denied it. I just deny that it's much of an advantage, let alone an unfair one, and in fact, it's a very bad idea.
And those wands aren't useful. Which is that particular build's problem. Thing is, you really don't need a lot of wands, you can only use two rings, a huge stack of rods is only marginally handy, you ultimately can't use more than a suit of armor, a weapon, and a shield at the same time, there are only so many scrolls that are ultimately useful before you start cutting into money better spent on a headband of intellect or pearls of power.
"Costs more" is dramatically different from "better." "Costs most" rarely means "best."
Thing is, he doesn't. He only needs to identify the largest source of cost (probably magic arms and armor), take that one for the discount, and THEN grab all the other goodies. Other players had to make choices. The cleric took off a couple of years and got more for it. And this could be a young gobblin, since pre-game crafting takes no time. It could take longer to craft than the character has been alive, yet they still get the benefit.
+1 armor takes one day to enchant. +3 takes nine. You can enchant an entire +3 suite in about a month.
And that one crafting feat might be more useful to someone than another is obvious. Weapon Focus: Battleaxe is more useful to a dwarven cleric than Weapon Focus: Club. And the Cleric of Moradin is still giving up a valuable feat slot that could be used for Toughness or Power Attack or Cleave or Extend Spell.
However, when crafting times exceed lifespans, it's time to return to that little "common sense" thing. If someone takes the time out of their life to craft something, then their backstory should include the time. But the odds are very much against craft times exceeding lifespans. Dwarves live a long time.
Wow, 6 pages of 4 people repeating themselves. Yikes.So your reaction to that observation is to then chime in a repeat on half of the argument? ; - p *OBVIOUS ATTEMPT AT HUMOR*
Edit: Wow. Ninja'd by da Ogre
*statement retracted for civility.* Have a nice day.
*Looks at bolded text*
*looks at Jandrem*
*Looks at bolded text*
*Looks at Jandrem*
Sorry if I offended you, I really was trying to joke around.
I wasn't offended, it was just as I looked over my original post, I had a hard time making a point without a lot of negativity and ranting, aimed at the thread in general, not individuals. So, in the interest of the thread, I retracted it. I could have simply deleted it, but I figured, it's out there, better to fix it than pretend it didn't happen.
In short, what works in one game doesn't necessarily work in someone else's. Can we at least agree on this? Come on guys, group hug!
In short, what works in one game doesn't necessarily work in someone else's. Can we at least agree on this? Come on guys, group hug!
Hehehe.... I think that's been said also ;) Some folks are more interested in 'winning' the Internets than actually engaging in civil discussion. Ultimately since little of this stuff is in the rules it's all about play style.
|
|
I wasn't offended, it was just as I looked over my original post, I had a hard time making a point without a lot of negativity and ranting, aimed at the thread in general, not individuals. So, in the interest of the thread, I retracted it. I could have simply deleted it, but I figured, it's out there, better to fix it than pretend it didn't happen.
In short, what works in one game doesn't necessarily work in someone else's. Can we at least agree on this? Come on guys, group hug!
Okay good, I piss enough people off on a day to day basis, I don't need to be doing in unintentionally if I can help it.
Yeah I am a big fan of fixing versus retracting, just seems better somehow.
And I also agree that every game is different. I would hug you but my keyboard is in the way ; - )
|
|
I've been following this thread with some interest, but for the sake of my own sanity have not elected to participate...until now! :p
A griffon rider who, as part of her training, raises her griffon from an egg and has the skills to do so? That makes sense and is perfectly reasonable.
Some schmuck starting out with a huge pile of iron pots to sell as soon as the game starts so that he can equip himself on the bigger stack of coins? That's just plain silly.
To me, this example points out the inequality of your argument. Griffin-rider uses his skill (Handle Animal) pre-game, and thus has something (a griffin) worth more than he paid for it. Approved.
Some-schmuck uses his skill (Craft: Blacksmithing) pre-game, and thus has something (a bunch if iron pots) worth more than he paid for it. Not approved.I don't see the difference. Why are some characters allowed to break the WBL guidelines and not others? Each has created extra value for his character. One just happens to be a useful pet, while the other is wealth (and presumably less wealth than than the value of the griffin, unless it was an incredible pile of iron pots).
The way I see it, if you're going to be doing game activities pre-game, you might as well do all of them. You should have to pay for food and housing while you're crafting, maybe even the cost to rent a forge (unless you have your own, in which case you should spend more time and money (and more day-to-day expenses) building that). Furthermore, to be more realistic, you should level-up and equip your character one level at a time, so you're not spending 5 levels of gold on a feat you've only had for 2 levels. But by this point, you're practically playing out the entire pre-game, which defeats the entire point of starting the game at a higher level.
The point is, one of the main costs of the crafting abilities is time. By allowing crafting pre-game, you're removing that cost. The WBL guidelines say nothing about how much "time" a PC is allowed to spend, it only mentions gold. You seem to be taking the position that since it doesn't say how much time you get, you have an infinite amount (more or less), while I would say the opposite - you get none.
One of your arguments stopped me, and had me thinking for awhile:
The Master Crafter is going to end up ahead of the WBL charts during the course of the game anyway - that's just how crafting works. Why is it okay during the game, but not pre-game?
I finally came to this conclusion: the WBL guidelines are there to make sure everyone starts out on a level playing field. Once in play, the players and GM can decide how they want the game to go. The GM may make crafting easy or difficult during the game, but the WBL guidelines make sure that everyone has the same starting line in terms of net worth (not expendable wealth).*
Furthermore, as I mentioned above, pre-game crafting basically circumvents the cost of time. Crafting is one of the only abilities that can break the WBL guidelines and still adhere to the RAI, which is why it's also one of the only abilities with such a big time investment.Presumably, during the game your fellow PCs aren't going to be jerks and go off adventuring while you're crafting. However, it's important that they have the opportunity yo do so if they wish. They are allowed to spend their time however they see fit during the game, as are you. They may slay monsters, go wenching, gather information, seek an audience with the king, etc, or simply wait for you to finish crafting that new sword for them. That's the cost of crafting - you invest your time in it while others are out doing other things
By crafting pre-game, you bypass this cost, and deny the other players the chance to have their characters act.
If someone showed up to a game with a bunch of pre-crafted items (let's say it would have taken them 2 months to craft them), I think it would be perfectly fair of the GM to turn to the other players and say "Okay, you have 2 months of free-time before the adventure begins. What do you want to do?"
Of course, this is all a matter of opinion, and you have demonstrated well the extent to which your heels are dug in. ;)
I am of the opinion that WBL should mean "starting net worth", rather than "a bag of cash and an infinite amount of time." I am also of the opinion that the cost of time in crafting is an important factor that cannot be glossed over. It seems we differ in these opinions.
That being said, if it works in your game, and makes your players happy, all the more power to you. If we were talking about a convention game, or PFS-type game though, I'd like to think that the ruling would be somewhat more in line with what PirateDevon, Mirror Mirror, and others have been advocating.
*This is the default, but may not be necessary in your game. I once was in a homebrew game where one of the players was allowed to be a prince (the youngest of his siblings, but still a prince). His net worth (and expendable wealth) were enormous compared to the rest of us, but he wasn't a dick about it, and we thought it was cool for the story, so it worked (except for one jealous player who was a d-bag...but that's another story).
ADDED: In reading what was posted while I was typing, I see that you've pointed out how the WBL is used for awarding treasure. If, as you say, WBL means cost and not value/worth, how can the GM ever distribute magic items as treasure?
For example...let's say the chart said to give the party 1000gp. The GM could give them 1000gp, or he could give them a 1000gp item (say a cloak of resistance +1). If he gives them the cloak...what if they sell it? They'd only have gotten 500gp, not 1000gp.
If he gets to use his craft skills before game play begins why can't I use my Sleight of Hands skill to earn money before game play begins? During normal play rogues use that to increase their wealth so rogues with Sleight of Hands are going to have above average wealth too, the rules should reflect this.
Oh the injustice!!
If he gets to use his craft skills before game play begins why can't I use my Sleight of Hands skill to earn money before game play begins? During normal play rogues use that to increase their wealth so rogues with Sleight of Hands are going to have above average wealth too, the rules should reflect this.
Oh the injustice!!
rogues make more money doing favors for the local thieves guild. i had a rogue who was paid 100 platinum pieces to deliver a letter for a particular mentor within the magnimar thieves guild. by the mentor himself. his thing was deliver the letter to his mother in turtleback ferry as soon as possible. it's as if he knew there was a flood. and it was just basically a "hi mom, i'm fine, how are you?" kinda thing. the guy was just that desperate to deliver that letter. maybe you won't get 100 platinum to deliver a letter. but you get more than a years worth of pickpocketing in less than 2 weeks.