It depends a lot on your party's lineup. Where are your weak spots, and what wand can you use to fill in the void?
I had a sorcerer in a party with no rogue, so I had a Knock wand. I used it so much, it crumbled to dust. The DM demanded to see my sheet when I said "Lucky for me, I have another one." LOL! I did.
Another great one is Protection from evil (or good, law, whatever). Read that spell. It can really save your bacon if you can use it on a few players when the threat is there, and it's not a spell you'd usually have ready. That's probably the best wand for a wizard.
Another good wand is Acid arrow. Use that on enemy casters. No save, no spell resistance. You just have to hit (long range, too). That caster has to make concentration checks this round and next round to get their spells off. Maybe they will, maybe they won't, but you made their life more difficult, and that's something. 4d4 damage, too.
You want 1st or 2nd level spells that you wouldn't normally memorize, or have scrolls of. Beyond that, they get too expensive. Your role in the party and their strengths and weaknesses should be your guide.
That said, I hope you've gotten a handy haversack and a few other items by now. At 4th level, there are other things that can help you survive better than a wand. At 6000 gp, I'd take the haversack and something to help your AC. Haversack (2000), bracers of armor +1 (2000), and all the spells you can stuff in your spellbook with the rest.
I'd wait a while on wands, unless you got lucky and struck it rich.
Avoid wands with saves as the saves are set at minimium stat plus spell level. Summon monster III is a decent one and magic missle is a never miss.
Summon Monster can provide a meat shield between you and your homicidal DM's pet monsters. After second level spells wands get real pricey real quick.
Avoid wands with saves as the saves are set at minimium stat plus spell level. Summon monster III is a decent one and magic missle is a never miss.
Summon Monster can provide a meat shield between you and your homicidal DM's pet monsters. After second level spells wands get real pricey real quick.
Burbles advises the OP that protection from evil, see invisibility, glitterdust, mage armor and any wands purchased for the use of your fellow Heroic Fishies are all a Good Idea.
Burbles also suggests that the OP consult with your fellow Heroic Fishies on the matter of what wands to purchase.
|
Wand of Magic Missile is one thing that kept my wizard participating at low levels. At CL 5th, that's 3d4+3 that you can spam every round, with no chance to miss or have the damage reduced (unless they have the Shield Spell active... Then you better hope you have some other offensive tactic). Partially charged wand of Detect Secret Doors (remember that 1st level wands at CL 1st are only 15gp per charge) with maybe 10 charges, just in case. Your party fighter will greatly appreciate you getting a Wand of Enlarge Person. Partially charged wand of Comprehend Languages, just in case you come across a document you can't read but don't have time to hammer out a linguistics check.
Avoid wands with saves as the saves are set at minimium stat plus spell level. Summon monster III is a decent one and magic missle is a never miss.
Summon Monster can provide a meat shield between you and your homicidal DM's pet monsters. After second level spells wands get real pricey real quick.
Yeah, I'll "second" the Magic Missile wand - great pick. Leaves your wizard open to prepare buff and utility spells while maintaining an offensive spell. Bards/druids/clerics might want to have a Cure wand of some sort. A Cure Light Wounds wand is not that expensive and gives you 50 healing doses. A Dispel Magic wand comes to mind as a handy one, too, if you can afford it.
any good wand ideas for my pseudodragon idea
I'm not sure if pseudodragons can hold wands. Mephits, yeah. Oh, well, if your GM's cool with it, so am I.
You can't go wrong with magic missile, really. He can fly around, a comfortable distance from your enemies, and just blast every round, no miss, no save. Not a ton of damage, but it's reliable and keeps him out of harm's way, for the most part.
If you end up crafting wands, you could make him some mean ones at a reasonable cost.
|
Some wands I like:
Grease - Yeah the save DC sucks but it forces a balance check every round you move through it and if you grease a weapon there is a save every round. Finally, you can grease people who have been grappled so they can escape.
Protection from Evil - Emergency get out of charm free spell. Great for when harpies charm half your party. Also provides a nice deflection bonus.
Silent Image - You can use silent image for all sorts of clever things.
Obscuring Mist - A nice spell which shuts down archers in a hurry. If you get ambushed you can throw this up to delay long enough to buff or escape.
Not a lot of second level spells I like on wands unless you are higher level and the wands are relatively cheap. Likewise third level.
Quick note: your wand of Mage armor doesn't stack with your bracers.
|
Some wands I like:
Grease - Yeah the save DC sucks but it forces a balance check every round you move through it and if you grease a weapon there is a save every round. Finally, you can grease people who have been grappled so they can escape.
Protection from Evil - Emergency get out of charm free spell. Great for when harpies charm half your party. Also provides a nice deflection bonus.
Silent Image - You can use silent image for all sorts of clever things.
Obscuring Mist - A nice spell which shuts down archers in a hurry. If you get ambushed you can throw this up to delay long enough to buff or escape.Not a lot of second level spells I like on wands unless you are higher level and the wands are relatively cheap. Likewise third level.
Quick note: your wand of Mage armor doesn't stack with your bracers.
Do you think bracers are worth it for wizards or sorcerers? A set of +4 bracers seems very expensive when you can just buy a wand for 750. What is your opinion?
Do you think bracers are worth it for wizards or sorcerers? A set of +4 bracers seems very expensive when you can just buy a wand for 750. What is your opinion?
Until you can afford bracers +4, the wand is a good deal. The problem is that you have to use the wand to get the benefit. That's fine, if you have the time.
Bracers, of course, are always on. That saves you the round you'll need to cast mage armor. Cast shield instead, then go all god-wizard on their a$$eS! :)
Take Use Magic Device.
Buy a Wand of Cure Light Wounds.
You'll thank me.
|
|
Take Use Magic Device.
Buy a Wand of Cure Light Wounds.
You'll thank me.
Most Wizards take CHA as a dump stat and UMD is not a class skill, which means that UMD score is going to be pretty terrible and as a result the roll needed to successfully use a wand of cure light is going to be fairly high. Roll even a single one and you're out of uses for the day.
Leave the CLW wand to the Cleric, Bard, Ranger, Paladin, Oracle, Inquisitor, or Witch (unless you're buying it to give it to them in the first place).
I'm a huge fan of Wands of Mage Armor as it's still pretty effective at a one hour duration, long enough for 2-3 closely spaced encounters. I personally prefer wands for behind-the-scenes between encounter spells with permanent or long-duration effects (e.g. Mage Armor) or with spells that can be used over-and-over again. Since wands require you to have them in-hand to use, a spell that can reasonably be used several times during combat (a level 3 wand of magic missiles, a wand of scorching ray, etc) is the most efficient.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A wand of Lesser Restoration is totally worth the expense. The cleric never has enough of them memorized and you always roll a "1" when you have 3 points of ability damage. :) IMO Wands of Cure Light Wounds are the most cost-effective healing item in the game(15 gp per charge).
My rule of thumb for spell selection goes like this:
1) Use Very Frequently, Save and/or SR, Caster Level makes more effective -Memorize
2) Use Often, No SR or Save, Base CL is still useful -Wand
3) Infrequent Use/niche spell -keep a scroll or two or recall with bonded item if in spellbook
Don't spend your loot on Bracers until you can buy something that negates the need for Mage Armor completely. (i.e. +4 or better) Until then you want to cast Mage Armor on yourself from your spells memorized. At level 4 it will last 4 hours, buy yourself a Pearl of Power lvl 1 (1000gp) Now you can recall the spell and cast it again after it wears off. (A wand of Mage Armor IS a good investment, but best used to cast on your melee characters when you run into incorporeal beings like ghosts.)
Instead get a wand of Shield. Even if you cast this with Extend Spell on it you're only going to get 8 minutes out of it. Casting it from a level 1 wand will last a minute which is more than long enough for the vast majority of your combats through out the game, even into your upper levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless you are buying a wand at a higher caster level (i.e. paying double or more for it) then it's round, not rounds.Some wands I like:
Grease - Yeah the save DC sucks but it forces a balance check every round you move through it and if you grease a weapon there is a save every round. Finally, you can grease people who have been grappled so they can escape.
In Pathfinder, Grease lasts for 1 min/level, not 1 round/level.
Another vote for a wand of magic missile (with a caster level of 3, 5, 7, or 9).
The other suggestions I'm not so sure about. If you just consider cost alone, the break-even point for wands vs. scrolls is around 22 charges. By that, I mean that if you use 22 charges from a fully-charged wand and then sell it, those 22 uses will cost you 750-(375*28/50)=540 gp, whereas if you bought 22 scrolls, it would cost you 22*25=550 gp. So how likely are you to use the wand 22 times? (If you're crafting scrolls, then you'll always save money using scrolls of course.) Now wands have the advantage that you won't draw an attack of opportunity using them in combat, but how often are you going to be casting Silent Image while being threatened?
One more comment: if you buy a wand, use it early and often! A wand that you rarely (or never) use is just a waste of money.
What Mirror, Mirror said. And situational party buffs. i.e., stuff that you wouldn't normally memorize, but, at some point, you might need 5 castings of, immediately.
Examples:
Mount (Everybody might need to get the hell away for 2 hours)
Enlarge Person
Reduce Person
Resist Energy
See Invis
Glitterdust
Invisibility-Cross
Again, I would suggest that Mount and See Invisibility are unlikely to get cast enough to merit buying a wand over buying (or crafting) scrolls.
Endure elements is another one like that, though in a wand it just doesn't last long enough to make it worthwhile.
I think you are getting spells a/o durations mixed up. The duration is 24 hours. Endure elements is a great spell for a wand. Caster level is mostly irrelevant, long, fixed duration, and you can bang enough charges out of a wand to keep the whole party from freezing to death (without using up all your first level spells) A full wand will give you about a week (depending on party size) to go wherever.
Again, I would suggest that Mount and See Invisibility are unlikely to get cast enough to merit buying a wand over buying (or crafting) scrolls.Mount maybe not, but See Invisible? I use that spell all the time (it helps there ARE often invisible opponents). Plus, you can hand it to the rogue for UMD. Nothing like an invisible rogue sneaking up on ANOTHER invisible rogue. He is totally flat-footed and surprised!
If we're talking about what wands are good for a non-spellcaster, that's a slightly different matter; as you point out, there are some spells that are "Personal" range that are extremely good, and a wand might be the only way to get access to them.
I'm skeptical that you would need to cast See Invisible 22 times before switching to something better like True Seeing, but I guess it's possible, depending on your campaign.
Resist Energy is a good example of a perfectly fine Wand.
I definitely agree, especially if you can find a cheap one crafted by a ranger. Sometimes you want to cast it on the whole party.
I'm skeptical that you would need to cast See Invisible 22 times before switching to something better like True Seeing, but I guess it's possible, depending on your campaign.
Unless I am mistaken, doesn't True Seeing have a 250 gold piece ointment cost per spell? Would that not make the wand a much more attractive (and less expensive) item per casting (this is wthout even looking at the item cost for the casting)?
As well, True Seeing is a 6th level spell, so not really applicable for wands.
|
|
Do you think bracers are worth it for wizards or sorcerers? A set of +4 bracers seems very expensive when you can just buy a wand for 750. What is your opinion?
Bracers are for monks or maybe sorcerers. Wizards can cast mage armor in the morning for multi hours. I tend to use wands for mage armor, you get more than 800 hours worth of mage armor in wands for the price of +4 bracers. Most of the time you are adventuring for less than 5 hours per day. Generally wizards and sorcerers have better solutions to defense than AC at higher levels.
|
|
Again, I would suggest that Mount and See Invisibility are unlikely to get cast enough to merit buying a wand over buying (or crafting) scrolls.
In general probably true, but for low level parties that are travelling a wand of mount is cheaper than buying horses and dealing with them. You can ride spell summoned mounts harder and don't have to worry about them getting killed when you are in killing people in their homes.
If you don't travel much or time traveling is just hand-waved (it often is) then it's probably not an issue. I've had a few games where it's been a good investment and a lot of games where it wasn't.
You can also use mounts as trap monkeys. Even if they can't go up/ down stairs you can summon one and send it down the hall ahead of you. It's a 15GP trap sensing device.
|
|
I wouldn't buy a wand at all. Save your money for non consumable items. Pearls of power for example.
I am a frugal player also but consumables have their place. They are particularly good for spells you can't cast, for example sorcerers and bards who have limited spell lists. They are also good for spells you don't use frequently. Your pearl of power isn't going to help you cast a spell you lack or let you spam a spell 10 times in a day (and sometimes you need to do just that).
Sometimes a wand is cheaper than the alternative. As I mentioned above a wand of mount can work out cheaper than buying horses for a party.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Always, always buy a wand of Cure Light Wounds, even if you have to hand it to someone else to use it. For out-of-battle healing, you won't get cheaper or more efficient than this.
Other great wands are:
Endure Elements: It lasts 24 hours even at level 1, so it's a great deal. It's a spell you really want to have when you need it, but don't want to have to prepare all the time.
Expeditious Retreat: It lasts 1 minute at 1st CL, which is long enough for most battles, and it gives a pretty impressive +30 ft. to your speed.
Ice Storm: As a 4th level spell it's fairly expensive, but it has no saving throw and the damage doesn't scale with CL anyway, so there's no need to make it any higher than the minimum CL. 5d6 is still a pretty decent amount of damage. It has a very large area effect (twice the radius of fireball) and is great against those pesky Rogues and others who have Evasion. No Reflex save, no Evasion. The only possible issue is SR, but hey, you can't have everything.
Obscuring Mist: Theres no saving throw, spell resistance, etc, so CL is totally irrelevant. The 1 minute duration at minium CL is long enough for most fights. This is a great spell to use to escape or just confound the enemy.
Knock: Another very useful spell that you don't necessarily want to prepare all the time but really want to have when its needed. It's also another great spell where CL is pretty much irrelevant, saving you money.
Silent Image: This is one of the most versatile spells in the game. The duration is concentration and the area is pretty large even at 1st level, so there's no problem making it 1st caster level. Since creatures only get to make a saving throw if they interact with the illusion, the low save DC on the wand also will rarely be an issue if you're creative and thoughtful about how you use it.
just a couple of points that haven't been mentioned yet.
on the wizard list, reduce person is a pretty solid buff for your wizard and cheap for a wand (you net +2 to hit on ranged attacks, +2 to AC and +5 stealth) short duration though (1 minute).
there are lots of great wands for UMD, but this strategy will take a long time to pay off if you are talking about getting reliable activation in combat (which is what you are thinking with your familiar, I imagine). You might want to see if you can talk your GM into letting you have access to a spell in the spell compendium which lets you give some of your spell slots to your familiar (6th level spell invest familiar with spell ability IIRC). costs nothing (money or skill ranks, only the spell slot) and works every time, basically doubling your spell output per round.
Lets not forget in most campaigns resources are infinite. AP's differ in that they have set treasure through the AP, however even here the DM has plenty of room to fudge around with the wealth.
Wands I like:
Extended Acid Arrow (plain acid arrow is good too)
Spiritual weapon
Cure Light Wounds
Infernal Healing (a GREAT wand spell)
Mount (Combat terrain and trapfinding unit)
Mage Armor
Shield (for lower levels... you want it but you don't want to waste slots on it)
Lesser Restoration (this will always have a use)
Delay Poison (the general idea is to get out of combat then use the Heal skill or some anti toxin)
Resist Energy (this is one I might consider actually going with a higher caster level on)
Bless Weapon
Enlarge Person
Protection from evil (please note that this is one of those choosing spells... it's actually protection from evil/good/law/chaos)
Good hope
Silence
|
|
Ice Storm: As a 4th level spell it's fairly expensive, but it has no saving throw and the damage doesn't scale with CL anyway, so there's no need to make it any higher than the minimum CL. 5d6 is still a pretty decent amount of damage. It has a very large area effect (twice the radius of fireball) and is great against those pesky Rogues and others who have Evasion. No Reflex save, no Evasion. The only possible issue is SR, but hey, you can't have everything.
Wow... 21,000 gold, so much you can do with that and you burn 420gp/ casting. I just couldn't do this, feels like standing on a bridge and pouring gold out of your purse ;)
Knock: Another very useful spell that you don't necessarily want to prepare all the time but really want to have when its needed. It's also another great spell where CL is pretty much irrelevant, saving you money.
I agree with the useful but don't want to prepare all the time but unless your party lacks a rogue or some other way of opening doors (Adamantine battleaxe) it's an 90gp/ door spell. Maybe if my GM lets me pick one up with 10 charges for 900 gold I might do it but I can't see picking up a 4500 gold wand when there are so many free door opening options out there.
I can deal with 1st level wands because they are cheap and very useful but the higher level wands are expensive.
But I'm cheap and my GM is stingy.
|
|
Lets not forget in most campaigns resources are infinite.
I guess I haven't played in 'most campaigns' yet then. In every game I've played resources available to my players are quite limited and my players complaints seem to indicate they don't feel resources are infinite either.
Maybe you meant something else? Ultimately if you assume infinite resources you can't give any practical advice at all.
Most of the wands you picked are good but
Extended Acid Arrow (plain acid arrow is good too)
At 225gp/ shot you get 2d4 damage per round for 10 rounds. I'm not seeing this as that great. Are you thinking perhaps fire and run away? Or is this just to force concentration checks every round? I can see this being useful but just can't see it being useful often enough to spend 11,250 on it. You could spend that same money and get three pearls of power which are much more flexible so you could cast it 4 times per day.
In other words I'm Ok with the tactic but can't see spending 225 gold per shot in advance on it.
Good Hope is pretty awesome but I'm just not feeling the love for a 15,000 item that you burn at 315gp/ encounter. It might be tempting. Fortunately we have a bard in our party so I don't have to make that call.
VigorInfernal Healing is a great wand for out of combat healing if you can get it and if your character and the folks he heals are ok with dealing with devil (literally). I was going to take this spell for my sorcerer but he's very much on the 'good' side of the alignment curve and I couldn't see him doing this.
|
|
I can deal with 1st level wands because they are cheap and very useful but the higher level wands are expensive.
But I'm cheap and my GM is stingy.
Go with staves. Price is about the same but you can at least recharge them when you have the time.
In general though knock is good for memorized as you might be tied up when using it. A scroll backup in case of emergencies is reasonable (or a high charge use of a staff that you use for something else).
For wizards I like the arcane bond and having knock in my spellbook is perfect for those rare occasions when it's really useful. For a sorcerer or wizard with a familiar a couple scrolls are enough. It's one of those spells that's really useful every once in a while. I've had whole campaigns where I've never cast it.
By "infinite" I mean that the "lost money" from using the wand will be given back to you in future in the treasure the GM hands out to keep you at wealth by level.
IN Theory:
If you have several permanent magical items you'll only get the little bit you need to keep at wealth by level as you level up.
However lets say you have a charged item (a wand in this case). As you use the wand up you have less wealth since it's value goes down per charge used. Once the wand is used up you are effectively down that much in your wealth by level -- which means the GM now needs to give you another source of wealth in addition to what you would normally get to keep you at "wealth by level".
That's the whole idea behind wealth by level -- that no matter what form or how you use it you'll still end up at the equilibrium point suggested. Yes your magical sword might be broke... but the GM is expected to get you something to keep your wealth where it needs to be -- In fact if you go "over" wealth by level you really shouldn't expect any treasure for a while -- you have to "even out" either by using stuff up, or by gaining exp/levels until you are back at even. This is easily shown in the LoF AP actually in the way it gets you ahead in some places before ditching you in the middle of nowhere so that you can't replenish or immediately use the resources you find in the next adventure.
Now on to the specific wands:
The extended acid arrow is indeed for the concentration checks, however as an on going source of damage it's good for most types of regeneration too (since it will negate it each round)... indeed 2d4 over 10 rounds is 20d4 which isn't bad off a wand that doesn't have to worry about save throws or spell resistance (at 3rd level too). Does it take time? Yes, but that time can be used to your advantage of course (see the concentration checks or hit and run tactics that you referenced).
Pearls of power are nice, but again reference the "in theory" above. That third level pearl is going to be expensive, and even then you have to have the spell prepped... where as with the wand you have the spell, it's going to do what it does and you can still prep a spell that would be more useful in your spell slot instead (one that does worry about spell resistance or saving throws or whatever have you).
Good Hope is indeed a better choice if you don't have a bard, if you do then it's less useful of course.
Infernal healing is specifically a great spell for a wand because caster level has absolutely NO effect on what it does -- it has a fixed duration and will (over time) net you more HP than a wand of cure light wounds. I understand not wanting to radiate evil... but honestly that's not going to be a huge issue 90%+ of the time.
Ice Storm: As a 4th level spell it's fairly expensive, but it has no saving throw and the damage doesn't scale with CL anyway, so there's no need to make it any higher than the minimum CL. 5d6 is still a pretty decent amount of damage. It has a very large area effect (twice the radius of fireball) and is great against those pesky Rogues and others who have Evasion. No Reflex save, no Evasion. The only possible issue is SR, but hey, you can't have everything.Wow... 21,000 gold, so much you can do with that and you burn 420gp/ casting. I just couldn't do this, feels like standing on a bridge and pouring gold out of your purse ;)
It would be half that price assuming you crafted it yourself, but yes, it's obviously an option for higher level characters. Of course, I guess at that point you should probably just make a staff instead.
Knock: Another very useful spell that you don't necessarily want to prepare all the time but really want to have when its needed. It's also another great spell where CL is pretty much irrelevant, saving you money.I agree with the useful but don't want to prepare all the time but unless your party lacks a rogue or some other way of opening doors (Adamantine battleaxe) it's an 90gp/ door spell. Maybe if my GM lets me pick one up with 10 charges for 900 gold I might do it but I can't see picking up a 4500 gold wand when there are so many free door opening options out there.
Of course you shouldn't use it frivolously, but there are times when you really need to get through a locked door quickly and 90gp is far from a bad deal. If it's something you think you'll rarely need, you could always make a few scrolls instead of a wand. All of the spells I mentioned are great scroll choices as well, for the same reasons.
[I can deal with 1st level wands because they are cheap and very useful but the higher level wands are expensive.
But I'm cheap and my GM is stingy.
I know the feeling, that's why I suggested spells that can be effective even at the minimum caster level.
|
|
By "infinite" I mean that the "lost money" from using the wand will be given back to you in future in the treasure the GM hands out to keep you at wealth by level...
...That's the whole idea behind wealth by level -- that no matter what form or how you use it you'll still end up at the equilibrium point suggested.
Generally wealth/ level is managed the way they manage it in organized play and in the adventure paths; treasure is metered out at a speed where the average player will have the average wealth per level by the time they get to a specific level. If you buy consumables and use them they are gone. I would imagine that most GMs roll that way too. This is the first I've heard of GMs micro-managing individual characters treasure the way you suggest.
Even if the GM did increase treasure because the group has been burning a lot of consumables you still benefit from being conservative because of inter group dynamics. The groups I play in generally distribute treasure equally so if one player is blowing through expensive items and the other is using his money in a more conservative way the more conservative player will wind up with more loot. The only way this isn't the case is if the GM targets items specifically at a character
Now on to the specific wands:
The extended acid arrow is indeed...
I have no issue with the tactics, just with the cost. Unless your GM is replenishing your wand supply the way you suggest it just doesn't compare to a 11,000gp item because you burn it up.
Pearls of power are nice, but again reference the "in theory" above. That third level pearl is going to be...
Clearly the treasure model in your games is vastly different from what I've played (and from organized play or Adventure Paths) so the economics of specific items works differently. Consumables in your game are not truly 'consumable' since the wealth is replenished by your GM and the whole item selection is different. If the OP's GM rolls like your group does then your choices might line up better. I suspect that your group is the exception though.
In Re: Wealth,
I believe Abraham is correct in regards to WBL guidelines and the expectations that DMs will make up for consumables, etc. Otherwise, higher level characters would never be able to meet the appropriate WBL target. If consumables are permanent deductions from character wealth, then what about selling magic items? A character that receives a +2 sword (8K gp) as part of his share, sells it for half to buy a better one, would then be 4K gp below WBL, forever.
While I suspect that Ogre is correct in that most DMs probably do place a level worth's of treasure for a level's worth of adventure, this causes problems as well. If the party rogue scouts ahead, does he/she get to increase his/her power by snatching treasure at the expense of the other players? Also, what happens if the players don't find that gem or that item, either by carelessness or bad luck? Or if they manage to bypass part of the challenges through good play? Are they just S.O.L.?
At some point, a DM has to check and see that the players are within a certain distance of the WBL, either high or low, and adjust treasure accordingly. That's part of the job. Placing treasure and then washing your hands of how it affects the game is abdicating a fundamental responsibility of the DM.
|
|
In Re: Wealth,
I believe Abraham is correct in regards to WBL guidelines and the expectations that DMs will make up for consumables, etc. Otherwise, higher level characters would never be able to meet the appropriate WBL target. If consumables are permanent deductions from character wealth, then what about selling magic items? A character that receives a +2 sword (8K gp) as part of his share, sells it for half to buy a better one, would then be 4K gp below WBL, forever.
If Abraham is 'correct' then why are both APs and Organized Play set up the way I described?
Note: I don't think there is a correct or incorrect way to play the game. The correct way to play is the way that involves everyone at the table having fun. I am certain Abrahams group has a blast and wouldn't suggest they change their play style because it's less common. I am suggesting that what Abraham describes is uncommon and so his advice based on that style of play is going to be of limited use.
Yes actually reading the text around the charts points out exactly what I said is what is supposed to be the way wealth by level works. You don't just get "880,000 gp" by the end of your character's life time, and if you add up the "treasure by encounter" you'll realize that it comes up higher than what you would get wealth by level -- in large part to help make up for the use of consumables such as wands, potions, raise deads, restorations, and so on. Many people also forget to include the wizard's spellbook as part of his wealth -- which it is, he could allow other wizards to look at it and copy his spells from it (much as he can do too) for the same price others would charge him to do it (presented in the magic section).
Now, in society play and AP's there is less of this since everything is structured and everyone gets exactly the same all the time -- this is part of the reason I personally hate society play and have a general distaste for APs (even ones as wonderful as what paizo puts out... and they are exceptional) -- the fact that it takes the GM's control of his game away from him (in society play more than in the AP since he can modify the APs to fit his and his parties needs).
In an organic campaign the GM can adjust appropriately as needed and since he controls what happens when to a large extent can adjust things as needed for his group.
I think in general people simply look at the charts and assume they know what the charts mean and represent -- the internet and computer games play a large roll in this I think, and grognards false belief that all this stuff has been "removed" from the game since 2nd edition.
That's simply not true. IF they would fully read what is put into the books they'll find that most of the material that they been complaining is missing is in fact still present and accounted for in the books. The rules of how the GM rules, how to adjust things to his liking, what different changes would mean -- however just like players will skip the fluff to get to the crunch of the PrC's GMs have a tendency to skip the "fluff" in the rule books to go straight to the rules and bemoan their "lack of control" and the "player entitlement" present in the game (which, if they would simply read what is there, doesn't really exist any more than it did in 2nd edition).
Please note I'm not directing this at anyone -- it something I've noticed in multiple editions of multiple games and a many reason I sit down and read the new stuff straight through when it comes out (I still regularly make mistakes, but it helps cut down on false assumptions for me).
EDIT:
AP's and Organized play is set up to keep everyone even. If someone does as you suggest and buy permanent items only and keeps to them they'll only use a set amount of wealth in their character's life time. However if someone runs their character as if it's an "organic" campaign (as I suggest) then they are going to burn through more wealth in their character's life time, which means more versatility than the other guy which would be "unfair".
Unfortunately the way organized play is set up (and always will be for "fairness") is unfair to those whose character's die, take negative levels, or have to use expensive spell components due to the fact that these things permanently reduce the amount of wealth they will ever get.
Just because things went badly for them they get even more punished by the permanent reduction in character effeciency. Look at replacing the witch's familiar for example: You are better off simply starting a new character than you are getting a new familiar for the witch because of how expensive this is.
Now Organized play simply can not compensate for this. The "fair" structure of this style of play prevents the GM from having the ability to move things back in line with their party.
AP's regularly give side bar advice on how to avoid this. They specifically point out problem areas, places to change things if the party needs help (or if they are breezing through the AP) so that the GM can adjust accordingly. A GM that simply "follows the book" all the way through the AP is (in my opinion) going to quickly have plot holes has the players do things that don't follow the 'normal' course for the AP.
|
|
Yes actually reading the text around the charts points out exactly what I said is what is supposed to be the way wealth by level works.
I just re-read that section and I just don't read it the way you do. What I see is roughly "If your party on average is below this amount then you should increase treasure given."
So assuming again that party treasure is split equally some characters will be ahead of the curve and some behind. The only way things balance the way you suggest is if there is some sort of micro management of individual wealth by the GM which is pretty unusual.
There is an assumption built into the way treasure is dispersed that some percentage of items will be consumed but if people were to start assuming they can burn items up because their resources are 'infinite' then that breaks those built in balances.
This of course begs the question; if consumables are essentially infinite then why do they have charges at all?