So I've ranted and raved about this, and here I have some darn proof.
A lot of times I read about GMs complaining of their characters seeming to have the right items to make some combination that, while within the rules, is fairly powerful. Other times, I see folks talking about hiring out high-level NPCs to cast high-level spells they have no business accessing. Call it what you will, me being a no-fun Nancy or my Dad being an Economics professor, but something about wizards hiring themselves out when they can basically print money past a certain level with Wall of Iron and similar spells never sat quite right with me. Therefore I have pulled forth a few unpleasant truths from the Core Rulebook that I feel should come to your attention if you are having these problems with your players. Who knows, by restricting these options more you may just make the game more risky, challenging and fun for all parties involved. I will also include a brief tirade on why magic users shouldn't be paid as LITTLE for their spells as they are.
#1: MAGIC ITEMS, EXCEPT POTIONS, ARE ALMOST NEVER GOING TO BE AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE AT THE BUYER'S CHOICE. (I would encourage restricting the number of potions for sale as well)
Magic items are valuable, and most major cities have at least one or two purveyors of magic items, from a simple potion merchant to a weapon smith that specializes in magic swords. Of course, not every item in this book is available in every town.
The following guidelines are presented to help GMs determine what items are available in a given community. These guidelines assume a setting with an average level of magic. Some cities might deviate wildly from these baselines, subject to GM discretion. The GM should keep a list of what items are available from each merchant and should replenish the stocks on occasion to represent new acquisitions.
The number and types of magic items available in a community depend upon its size. Each community has a base value associated with it (see Table: Available Magic Items). There is a 75% chance that any item of that value or lower can be found for sale with little effort in that community. In addition, the community has a number of other items for sale. These items are randomly determined and are broken down by category (minor, medium, or major). After determining the number of items available in each category, refer to Table: Random Magic Item Generation to determine the type of each item (potion, scroll, ring, weapon, etc.) before moving on to the individual charts to determine the exact item. Reroll any items that fall below the community's base value.
Table: Available Magic Items
Community Size Base Value Minor Medium Major
Thorp 50 gp 1d4 items — —
Hamlet 200 gp 1d6 items — —
Village 500 gp 2d4 items 1d4 items —
Small town 1,000 gp 3d4 items 1d6 items —
Large town 2,000 gp 3d4 items 2d4 items 1d4 items
Small city 4,000 gp 4d4 items 3d4 items 1d6 items
Large city 8,000 gp 4d4 items 3d4 items 2d4 items
Metropolis 16,000 gp * 4d4 items 3d4 items
You see that? This means even if you WANTED to sell all those potions of cure light wounds to the PCs, they only have a 75% chance of finding each one, probably rolling each time to avoid not finding another one. I would just have a decent stock on hand (1d4+1, increasing the die size and adding 1 for each larger community) of select potions, maybe cure light wounds and magic weapon. Regardless, this isn't going to replace a cleric. Letting your whole high-level party pour their GP into those potions can and will replace a healer. At high levels this eliminates fun entirely. No one is ever afraid to die because they just spend an ever decreasing fraction of the money you give them to not die. The 75% chance is kind of silly, but I don't believe the meaning of the rule should be discounted: You DON'T get to have whatever you want, whenever you want it.
Also, shopping for a specific item? That +2 item even? You HAVE to go to a small city to have a great chance of buying it. Otherwise the minor magic item they have in stock is likely a potion or scroll, since the d4s of magic items are generated using the magic item generator tables. Unless your world is filled with small cities (And assuming the country with all those cities has the economy to support them) you don't stand a chance of buying it, the DM has got to hand it to you when he thinks you need it.
#2: FORGET YOUR PERMANENCY SPELL, I CAST WALL OF IRON! (Or how I learned to stop worrying and love the trade goods chart)
Other Wealth
Merchants commonly exchange trade goods without using currency. As a means of comparison, some trade goods are detailed on Table: Trade Goods.
Table: Trade Goods
Cost Items
1 cp One pound of wheat
2 cp One pound of flour, or one chicken
1 sp One pound of iron
5 sp One pound of tobacco or copper
1 gp One pound of cinnamon, or one goat
2 gp One pound of ginger or pepper, or one sheep
3 gp One pig
4 gp One square yard of linen
5 gp One pound of salt or silver
10 gp One square yard of silk, or one cow
15 gp One pound of saffron or cloves, or one ox
50 gp One pound of gold
500 gp One pound of platinum
A pound of iron is one silver piece. This may not seem like much until you read the entry for wall of iron:
Components V, S, M (a small iron sheet plus gold dust worth 50 gp)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect iron wall whose area is up to one 5-ft. square/level; see text
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw see text; Spell Resistance no
You cause a flat, vertical iron wall to spring into being. The wall inserts itself into any surrounding nonliving material if its area is sufficient to do so. The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or another object. It must always be a flat plane, though you can shape its edges to fit the available space.
A wall of iron is 1 inch thick per four caster levels.
This spell means that any wizard who bans conjuration hates money.
I know this has been done before, but I don't think ANYONE understands just how much metal this produces.
Rules for Obtaining Approximate Weight of Iron.
For Round Bars. Rule : Multiply the square of the diameter in inches by the length in feet, and that product by 2.6. The product will be the weight in pounds, nearly.
For Square and Flat Bars. Rule : Multiply the area of the end of the bar in inches by the length in feet, and that by 3.32. The product will be the weight in pounds, nearly.
Wrought Iron, usually assumed:
A cubic foot=480 lbs.
A square foot, 1 inch thick= 40 lbs
It costs you 50 gp to cast this spell. At minimum level, you make a 2 inch thick wall of iron with a 55ft square area. At 8 gp per foot, that's still 440 gp. The next level, the thickness in inches increases, making the price per square foot 12 gp instead. That's free money assuming you find a buyer. But wait, you provide another service: FREE TRANSPORTATION. That's a cut down on labor costs for a LOT of iron transport, even from a mage who's just learned the spell. You could probably get around 20-40% of those costs as well, netting you a bit more pocket change with each transaction. The wizard could also likely negotiate a contract with the king of the land, obtaining a monopoly on Iron and increasing its price to vary the amount of profits received, depending on how the market reacts to the influx of iron. He could even, with that monopoly, make it Illegal to sell other forms of iron, thus netting himself a nice profit. Assuming other wizards can keep the market competitive, it's still a very profitable business provided the wizards can keep finding buyers. At that level, they could be getting paid 660 GP for a 6th level spell, assuming someone WANTS their services. If we weren't talking about such a great deal of money, any other economy would have a wizard in ruins. Screw that, they're a mage with things to do. Tell those PCs you're busy and keep pocketing thousands of gold a day with each casting, and at higher levels double the area with an Enlarge Spell. The time to process that amount means the Wizard is eating up maybe a spell per day at most. Wizards with such steady employment should be commonplace with those kinds of results, bringing me to my next point:
#3: GETTING CASTERS TO CAST MAGIC SHOULD NOT BE CHEAP.
Spellcasting and Services
Service Cost
Coach cab 3 cp per mile
Hireling, trained 3 sp per day
Hireling, untrained 1 sp per day
Messenger 2 cp per mile
Road or gate toll 1 cp
Ship's passage 1 sp per mile
Spellcasting Caster level × spell level × 10 gp3
That last figure is a mystery to me. According to that figure, a cure light wounds spell costs 10 gp to get. Nevermind the fact that a Messenger has to run 5 miles a day to pay for his food that day (1 sp), who sets these prices? Spellcasting should a be a highly competitive market, like any other major business. Assuming there aren't insurance companies in this medieval game to pay the casters what they want, let's think about the other options available if you want to cast a spell- For the common fellow, at least.
1: Potions. While these MAY start out as affordable, we quickly see the truth of the matter:
Table: Potion Costs
Spell Level Cleric, Druid, Wizard Sorcerer Bard Paladin, Ranger
0 25 gp 25 gp 25 gp —
1st 50 gp 50 gp 50 gp 50 gp
2nd 300 gp 400 gp 400 gp 400 gp
3rd 750 gp 900 gp 1,050 gp 1,050 gp
Wait, what? 300 gp for a second level spell? Oh well, I guess I can just get a scroll and have a Rogue UMD it...
Table: Scroll Costs
Spell Level Cleric, Druid, Wizard Sorcerer Bard Paladin, Ranger
0 12.5 gp 12.5 gp 12.5 gp —
1st 25 gp 25 gp 25 gp 25 gp
2nd 150 gp 200 gp 200 gp 200 gp
3rd 375 gp 450 gp 525 gp 525 gp
4th 700 gp 800 gp 1,000 gp 1,000 gp
5th 1,125 gp 1,250 gp 1,625 gp —
6th 1,650 gp 1,800 gp 2,400 gp —
7th 2,275 gp 2,450 gp — —
8th 3,000 gp 3,200 gp — —
9th 3,825 gp 4,050 gp — —
Looks like the Economics wizards beat me to the punch. A scroll costs half as much as a potion to make. Since only two classes are likely to know how to activate those, we can assume that these prices are correct. Clearly a lower competition market like scrolls will have a lower price to encourage buying in groups. Think of it like buying computer parts to make your own computer instead of buying a manufactured one. By doing this, Wizards especially benefit from being able to sell to one another (likely the main buyers) and from being able to use potions to appeal to a larger group of buyers. So where's the profit margin in selling the spells directly?
A second level spell costs 60 gp. If it was a scroll, it would net the caster 75 gp in profits. We can assume this as a baseline, since obviously the buyer does not want a scroll, or he would have asked for one to be made. At most, we could charge 149 gp, since 150 gp is the profit made form making a potion. In all likelihood, we would charge around 120-150 gp depending on the available competition, making it cheaper than producing the more labor-intensive potion but not so expensive as to prohibit the purchase of this ability and to instead cause the buyer to head for the scroll rack and a hard on his luck bard or rogue. To simplify things, the equation becomes: 2-2.5 x spell level x caster level (minimum required, unless caster level increase has added benefits) x 10 gp. That's assuming a fairly competitive economy. In an area with maybe only ONE really powerful wizard or cleric, he could charge anywhere 3-4.5 times the standard rate and no one would know the difference, since he'd still be ahead of the (nonexistant) potion market and the (select few capable, especially at high level) scroll market. This cuts far more heavily into the party's gold. Regenerate (7x13x10=910) becomes a 1820 gp MINIMUM spell. My 8th level group would balk at shilling that out. Things that only a certain class could cast would enjoy an even larger price boost as well.
I shouldn't need to say this, but people who sell their skills for money don't usually get to set the prices. Unfortunately for Adventurers, they always have enough money that they will be buyers. They should expect to pay through the nose for what are basically hirelings, making up for any skill they lack. Career wizards would become a major feature of any major city, and many noblemen would likely employ one for a large fee to cast spells at his leisure. As it stands, the PCs can whine all they want about the prices, but really, the casters have an unshakable corner on the market. You have magic or you don't. There's no way to enter into this market if you're not already in it, and no reason to make less profit aside from generosity, which doesn't build churches, feed the homeless, or discover a cure for Mummy Rot. Peasants who aren't bottom of the rung messengers can earn a potion of cure light wounds, or one of stabilize, after working for about a month. Since even they can pay it, there's no reason not to charge them around 20 gp instead if they just need to be recuperated with a cure light wounds.
#2: FORGET YOUR PERMANENCY SPELL, I CAST WALL OF IRON! (Or how I learned to stop worrying and love the trade goods chart)PG 140 wrote:
Other Wealth
Merchants commonly exchange trade goods without using currency. As a means of comparison, some trade goods are detailed on Table: Trade Goods.
Table: Trade Goods
Cost Items
1 cp One pound of wheat
2 cp One pound of flour, or one chicken
1 sp One pound of iron
5 sp One pound of tobacco or copper
1 gp One pound of cinnamon, or one goat
2 gp One pound of ginger or pepper, or one sheep
3 gp One pig
4 gp One square yard of linen
5 gp One pound of salt or silver
10 gp One square yard of silk, or one cow
15 gp One pound of saffron or cloves, or one ox
50 gp One pound of gold
500 gp One pound of platinumA pound of iron is one silver piece. This may not seem like much until you read the entry for wall of iron:
Wall of Iron wrote:
Components V, S, M (a small iron sheet plus gold dust worth 50 gp)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect iron wall whose area is up to one 5-ft. square/level; see text
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw see text; Spell Resistance no
You cause a flat, vertical iron wall to spring into being. The wall inserts itself into any surrounding nonliving material if its area is sufficient to do so. The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or another object. It must always be a flat plane, though you can shape its edges to fit the available space.
A wall of iron is 1 inch thick per four caster levels.
This spell means that any wizard who bans conjuration hates money.
I know this has been done before, but I don't think ANYONE understands just how much metal this produces.
The Practical Mechanic wrote:
Rules for Obtaining Approximate Weight of Iron.
For Round Bars. Rule : Multiply the square of the diameter in inches by the length in feet, and that product by 2.6. The product will be the weight in pounds, nearly.
For Square and Flat Bars. Rule : Multiply the area of the end of the bar in inches by the length in feet, and that by 3.32. The product will be the weight in pounds, nearly.
Wrought Iron, usually assumed:
A cubic foot=480 lbs.
A square foot, 1 inch thick= 40 lbs
It costs you 50 gp to cast this spell. At minimum level, you make a 2 inch thick wall of iron with a 55ft square area. At 8 gp per foot, that's still 440 gp. The next level, the thickness in inches increases, making the price per square foot 12 gp instead. That's free money assuming you find a buyer. But wait, you provide another service: FREE TRANSPORTATION. That's a cut down on labor costs for a LOT of iron transport, even from a mage who's just learned the spell. You could probably get around 20-40% of those costs as well, netting you a bit more pocket change with each transaction. The wizard could also likely negotiate a contract with the king of the land, obtaining a monopoly on Iron and increasing its price to vary the amount of profits received, depending on how the market reacts to the influx of iron. He could even, with that monopoly, make it Illegal to sell other forms of iron, thus netting himself a nice profit. Assuming other wizards can keep the market competitive, it's still a very profitable business provided the wizards can keep finding buyers. At that level, they could be getting paid 660 GP for a 6th level spell, assuming someone WANTS their services. If we weren't talking about such a great deal of money, any other economy would have a wizard in ruins. Screw that, they're a mage with things to do. Tell those PCs you're busy and keep pocketing thousands of gold a day with each casting, and at higher levels double the area with an Enlarge Spell. The time to process that amount means the Wizard is eating up maybe a spell per day at most.
Last sentence of last paragraph says "Iron created by this spell is not suitable for use in the creation of other objects and cannot be sold."
...
#2: FORGET YOUR PERMANENCY SPELL, I CAST WALL OF IRON! (Or how I learned to stop worrying and love the trade goods chart)PG 140 wrote:
Other Wealth
Merchants commonly exchange trade goods without using currency. As a means of comparison, some trade goods are detailed on Table: Trade Goods.
Table: Trade Goods
Cost Items
1 cp One pound of wheat
2 cp One pound of flour, or one chicken
1 sp One pound of iron
5 sp One pound of tobacco or copper
1 gp One pound of cinnamon, or one goat
2 gp One pound of ginger or pepper, or one sheep
3 gp One pig
4 gp One square yard of linen
5 gp One pound of salt or silver
10 gp One square yard of silk, or one cow
15 gp One pound of saffron or cloves, or one ox
50 gp One pound of gold
500 gp One pound of platinumA pound of iron is one silver piece. This may not seem like much until you read the entry for wall of iron:
Wall of Iron wrote:
Components V, S, M (a small iron sheet plus gold dust worth 50 gp)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect iron wall whose area is up to one 5-ft. square/level; see text
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw see text; Spell Resistance no
You cause a flat, vertical iron wall to spring into being. The wall inserts itself into any surrounding nonliving material if its area is sufficient to do so. The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or another object. It must always be a flat plane, though you can shape its edges to fit the available space.
A wall of iron is 1 inch thick per four caster levels.
This spell means that any wizard who bans conjuration hates money.
I know this has been done before, but I don't think ANYONE understands just how much metal this produces.
The Practical Mechanic wrote:
Rules for Obtaining Approximate Weight of Iron.
For Round Bars. Rule : Multiply the square of the diameter in inches
I missed that, but that sentence doesn't make sense in-game. Why can't it be sold and why is it unsuitable for use in the creation of other objects? That's a whole 30 minutes of my life wasted. Ah well, at least I can still cast Silent Image on it and myself to sell it once or twice.
The problem isn't solved with that, though. The market can just as easily be cornered on, say, teleporting, nondetection, any service spell that becomes in high demand from a rich buyer, like adventurers or BBEGs. I could see Secret Chest becoming a commonly sought spell by nobility and adventurers to hide certain valuables, and at a rate of only 900 gp every 60 days (plus the 5000 gp surcharge, ahem...), that's a lifesaver.
Consider this: In order to spend an hour preparing that spell, the wizard has to make enough profit that he wouldn't have rather made a potion or scroll instead. In all likelihood, if he doesn't have the spell he'll have to spend hours copying it. Then he has to spend the rest of the day and prepare it tomorrow. He could have made a scroll during that time of an in-demand spell and netted a lot of cash. Plus, how are the adventurers or whoever demanded the spell going to know its value? Might as well make a decent profit until the market gets driven down.
PG 460-461 wrote:
Magic items are valuable, and most major cities have at least one or two purveyors of magic items, from a simple potion merchant to a weapon smith that specializes in magic swords. Of course, not every item in this book is available in every town.The following guidelines are presented to help GMs determine what items are available in a given community. These guidelines assume a setting with an average level of magic. Some cities might deviate wildly from these baselines, subject to GM discretion. The GM should keep a list of what items are available from each merchant and should replenish the stocks on occasion to represent new acquisitions.
The number and types of magic items available in a community depend upon its size. Each community has a base value associated with it (see Table: Available Magic Items). There is a 75% chance that any item of that value or lower can be found for sale with little effort in that community. In addition, the community has a number of other items for sale. These items are randomly determined and are broken down by category (minor, medium, or major). After determining the number of items available in each category, refer to Table: Random Magic Item Generation to determine the type of each item (potion, scroll, ring, weapon, etc.) before moving on to the individual charts to determine the exact item. Reroll any items that fall below the community's base value.
Table: Available Magic Items
Community Size Base Value Minor Medium Major
Thorp 50 gp 1d4 items — —
Hamlet 200 gp 1d6 items — —
Village 500 gp 2d4 items 1d4 items —
Small town 1,000 gp 3d4 items 1d6 items —
Large town 2,000 gp 3d4 items 2d4 items 1d4 items
Small city 4,000 gp 4d4 items 3d4 items 1d6 items
Large city 8,000 gp 4d4 items 3d4 items 2d4 items
Metropolis 16,000 gp * 4d4 items 3d4 items
You bring up something else that is interresting too.
Even assuming that a cleric/wizard player with the Craft Arms & Armor feat, how big of a community does he/she need to be in to actually make a +2 sword? How many communitys will have the reagents and metals available for purchase?
If the Magician/Crafter is living in a smaller community, would that not also figure into the crafting time.
The vast majority of magic in this game is created by DMs who think it will be cool. They're not so different from players after all.
The economy doesn't work and if a player wants to break the game they will.
Players and DMs have to work together to enjoy an adventure. DMs should not get so wrapped up in their simulation that players are a 'threat'. Players should recognize that they share the game world with others, including the DM, and refrain from hammering the weak spots when they can enjoy the good bits.
What would be fun? Thats usually the best place to start and not a bad place to get to either.
The vast majority of magic in this game is created by DMs who think it will be cool. They're not so different from players after all.
The economy doesn't work and if a player wants to break the game they will.
Players and DMs have to work together to enjoy an adventure. DMs should not get so wrapped up in their simulation that players are a 'threat'. Players should recognize that they share the game world with others, including the DM, and refrain from hammering the weak spots when they can enjoy the good bits.
What would be fun? Thats usually the best place to start and not a bad place to get to either.
What would be fun is if there was a point to a spellcaster knowing anything but battle spells/environmental spells. With the current system there isn't, and it makes no logical sense for wizards to sell their spells cheaply when they make more money through other means.
We shouldn't have to tolerate a game with "weak spots". Game design is easy, and modifications can be made to make the game run better. In this case, a proposition to make magic users matter in a global scale and be capable of establishing themselves within the setting is the general goal. As is, they make practically no money, meaning no magic items. Every caster I've seen make items has been a player who was soon tired of all of the tracking and whatnot involved. If they made some worthwhile dough, maybe they wouldn't feel that way.
And every time I hear a DM complain that the characters are abusing the rules, well, here are some better ones, IMO to prevent abuse. Not all players are responsible. Some players I knew in 3.5 would abuse the rules to the point of the game not being fun, often due to these exact rules and the DM being too lazy to disallow them buying anything they wanted. This is damage control for a broken system in an otherwise efficiently revamped game, and a way for spellcasters to, well, compete and have fun making money.
Not working to fix something because it doesn't work merely lets that part stay broken. Players should have no right to ruin the game that they are in by following the rules of that game. It would be like if I could buy Park Place and Boardwalk in Monopoly on the second or third lap just by having enough money by mortgaging one and using the money to buy the other and the players not reading the rules properly.
Finally, no DM should have to put up with being crossed by their own system. Players overcoming a decent and acceptable challenge, like "track this guy to his lair" should not be solvable by saying "I pay a cleric (Just "a cleric" because this NPC has no personality) 450 gp and we find him.", especially not at around 2nd-3rd level. Magic solving everything is harmful to the narrative as a whole to the game when it's so cheap you don't bat an eye at 8th level for a 7th level spell ("Oh, only 910 gold? Whew I thought it was going to be expensive."). If easily solving any challenge by throwing money at it is considered fun, then I'm going to play a homeless person in every game I'm in with a profound fear of money just to get some challenge (fun for me) out of the system.
I declared that casters about (character level) 9th want for nothing, are quirky, and extremely difficult to contact or reason with.
In my Runelords campaign, there is exactly one high level caster known to the players: Toth Bhreacher of the Golemworks. The players had exactly zero chance of meeting him in person, except they have a Warforged in the party who is of interest to Toth. The players have derived no benefit from contacting him, but Toth has gotten everything he wants out of the relationship, and is intently scrying on the party waiting for a TPK so he can snatch up the spare parts.
Even "good" clerics of very high level live in remote temples. These people can actually plane shift. In earth mythology, there are a few figures who could shift planes of existence: they don't usually come back. They don't often have a reason to. If they do come back, you can be damn sure it's not to enchant a mid-level adventurer's axe and shield.
And good luck tracking down a high level Druid.
So I've ranted and raved about this, and here I have some darn proof.
A lot of times I read about GMs complaining of their characters seeming to have the right items to make some combination that, while within the rules, is fairly powerful. Other times, I see folks talking about hiring out high-level NPCs to cast high-level spells they have no business accessing. Call it what you will, me being a no-fun Nancy or my Dad being an Economics professor, but something about wizards hiring themselves out when they can basically print money past a certain level with Wall of Iron and similar spells never sat quite right with me.
I guess it depends on the definition of 'high level'. At 9th level Wizards can manage things like Teleport and Fabricate; genuine money making spells...BUT...these things aren't the ticket to unlimited money. Demand for teleports is generally low, and you need good skills to make serious cash (masterwork items) out of Fabricate - and never mind market demand for such items (fairly low). In this range, the idea of 500gp per day profit (which what magic item crafting yields) is still an attractive payoff, and well worth their time.
At MUCH higher levels (15+), of course, time>money. High level characters generally have their fingers in things that demand their attentions, so taking weeks/months off to make widget X isn't an option they're willing to consider, UNLESS the person in question can save them lots of time in return, or deal with a problem they have. I think DMs need to remember that nobody gets to be high level without being a driven individual; even 'retired' adventurers generally are still very busy people.
I suppose a few spellcasters would still make a living making magic items (even @ 20th level, 500gp per day isn't chump change, but they probably do it b/c they like making magic items), but if there's actually demand for such items they'll probably be booked well in advance (on things for people more important than the PCs, most likely).
But yeah, the whole expectation of being able to get 'whatever they want' is pretty much out of whack - UNLESS the party's spellcasters are in the item creation business.
I suppose a few spellcasters would still make a living making magic items (even @ 20th level, 500gp per day isn't chump change, but they probably do it b/c they like making magic items), but if there's actually demand for such items they'll probably be booked well in advance (on things for people more important than the PCs, most likely).
But yeah, the whole expectation of being able to get 'whatever they want' is pretty much out of whack - UNLESS the party's spellcasters are in the item creation business.
I think this actually makes having a spellcaster in the party more significant, otherwise it'd be a party of all fighters and a rogue off to save the day, just hiring out wizards to cast spells or getting the rogue to UMD them.
Agreed, item creation feats should always be a big deal. In one game where I played a Cleric, everyone wanted custom weapons from me. At high level you become one cool guy, slapping shocking burst onto every weapon, keen onto them after that, but in 3.5 it cost xp and I was willing to take it because I didn't care all that much.
The high level NPCs in my game will usually only do something as a favor or to help their own agenda, never for money since they don't really need it. The King is a 13th level Fighter. The Orc Warchief is a 15th level barbarian. Are they going to help you kill dem kobolds because you pay them 100 gp an hour? No. They really could care less if th price is under 10000 gp, they have civilizations to run.
I have read a lot of complaints of GM about this topic. I am a GM myself and a player often.
As a GM I really don't bother. I take the guidelines of the book and rolls for items they want. If its something completeley logical than they can buy it anyway.
But most of the partys I had an have played in have Item Creation feats. And Woundrous items and Craft magic arms and armor are always taken by Two Players in course of time.
In this case i feel that i can't deney them, because the took seriously effort to gain magical items. I make only sure that the item creators have most of the time enough time to make their own items and Bareley enough time to make something els. Them they have to choose: For myself or party helpers!
Another point: For many players is the ability to buy/create items a big issue. I know that ik can crush you battles. Make sure your plots, story and other thins are fare more fun then then te battle. If it turns out that they destroyed your monsters it does'nt matter. If you feel that players should always have a hard time in combat. Play the board game Descent!
Qute SilvercatMoonpaw
I think the game should have a book of official rules tweaks so that it can be customized for the position on the scales of things like difficulty of combat for individual GMs/groups.
Thats absolutely a very good suggestion!
It might at least reduce some of the arguing.
And what's so bad about arguing?
/irony
What about supply and demand?
Many archaic societies have never heard of Milton Friedman or Ayn Rand or Adam Smith. In my homebrew, there is a Wizard's Guild, and this organization is _NOT_ dedicated to providing plentiful and low-priced magic to everybody.
So when the barony is under attack, the baron might be able to make a payment to the guild to temporarily open their libraries and make magic available to head off the threat, but usually it is pay or do without. The Guild sets prices, and free marketers may say "That creates shortages", but do you think the Wizards care?
The other side of the equation is finding a spellcaster capable of casting the spells.
I've come up with my own demographic theories. About one NPC out of 30 can cast spells, but only one out of a hundred is actually a Wizard or the equivalent. Of those Wizards, about 97% are below 5th level, and 99% are below 7th level.
If you want a Wall of Iron, you have to find an 11th level Wizard (or the equivalent). There is about one of those for 200,000 NPCs. And do you think that guy is going to go where you want and make you a wall? A wizard willing and able to sell you walls of iron would be literally one in a million. It takes a lot of effort to become an 11th level Wizard, and such people are unlikely to be satisfied with mundane pursuits.
And who would even think of such a thing. Now that I think of it, I suppose it is possible that someone would, but per Guild rules, he'd charge the going rate for this. It works out to about 2000 gp for a 20 x 20 foot of wall, using the price guidelines above. If somebody wanted to fork out the money, he could build himself an iron castle.
As for magic items, in my homebrew I declared that most item creation secrets were lost, so to commission a magic item, PCs would need to find someone who had the necessary skills. Otherwise it is just random selection city. On the other hand, life is not fair, and it is possible that there are a bunch of +2 halberds available because hundreds of years ago the King commissioned the creation of such weapons for his personal guard.
Your houserules more or less make it stupid and inane to be anything but a caster. Your fighters will be unable to purchase the gear they need to stay on top of their game, while wizards and sorcerers can just "hah hah whatever I don't need to spend money for MY abilities" their way through everything.
People, martial classes need magic items. Magic classes by and large don't.
You've taken a game where casters are already somewhat favored and made the disparity worse.
You've taken a game where casters are already somewhat favored and made the disparity worse.
Quoted for emphasis.
Your houserules more or less make it stupid and inane to be anything but a caster. Your fighters will be unable to purchase the gear they need to stay on top of their game, while wizards and sorcerers can just "hah hah whatever I don't need to spend money for MY abilities" their way through everything.
People, martial classes need magic items. Magic classes by and large don't.
You've taken a game where casters are already somewhat favored and made the disparity worse.
Not that I disagree with any of this, but I personally prefer the low magic feel to my game, but don't eliminate magic classes.
As for your gear, martial classes mostly need weapons armor and stat items. For flavor, in my game, someone with the Master Craftsman feat can make weapons with enhancement bonus to hit and damage. It isn't "magic" though, just superior craftsmanship. As per PF +3 or better enhancment bonus pierces through certain DR, but doesn't pierce through dr/magic unless it is crafted in part by magic, whic means that category of DR isn't useless past like level 2.
I don't like all the houserules either, but I appreciate the sentiment.
Your houserules more or less make it stupid and inane to be anything but a caster. Your fighters will be unable to purchase the gear they need to stay on top of their game, while wizards and sorcerers can just "hah hah whatever I don't need to spend money for MY abilities" their way through everything.
People, martial classes need magic items. Magic classes by and large don't.
You've taken a game where casters are already somewhat favored and made the disparity worse.
Wow, I almost thought this was directed towards me. Dodged that rage bullet.
I typically have a few powerful characters of a variety of classes in my game who are interested in interacting with the PCs. The commissions they get for crafting higher level magic arms and armor make doing so worth their time. With enchantments not degrading over time, there's a decent backlog of powerful items in my game since the world is older than 100 years.
As far as wizards having ecclesiastic guilds, I don't have that. magical knowledge is in books, and "spellbooks" are usually books with one or two spells in them and a detailed analysis of how the spell works. This gives a couple more uses to knowledge arcana, like "How do genetics work?", and lets the wizard be the smart guy and not just the buff my allies and make enemies cry guy.
I would also like to point out that despite my brain exploding from the concept, wall of iron is useless for selling or making stuff in Pathfinder because game balance. I don't know why they didn't just change it to "Wall of Pig Iron" (Or change it to pig iron in the descriptor) and then have it's value be 1 cp per square foot, but it invalidates my second example.
What about supply and demand?
Come on, Economics in DND, it never worked!
You've taken a game where casters are already somewhat favored and made the disparity worse.
Quoted again because it hit the nail on the head.
Spellcasters are pretty darned good. Really, they are. The system makes them darned useful in combat, and pretty versatile out of combat too. Most magic items duplicate effects that spellcasters can already do.
The harder magic items are to get - the worse the characters get, but it's not equal. The non-casters suffer more. much more.
If the availability of magic items is going to be used as a tool in order to reduce the disparity between the classes - you are doing the opposite of what needs to be done.
Just so we're clear, everything posted in the first post is from the book, sans the change to hiring wizards. This stuff was put in the book, guys. They are not my or anyone else's house rules. The fact that I have lists of magic items via school in my games is beside the point since the houserule isn't in this thread: You are either referring to Utgardloki's tiny post or to my ginormous post. In one case, yes, Utgardloki's mention of making magic items hard to commission does make a lot of problems if they're not open to buy. In the other case, you may need to evaluate your reading comprehension skills. Let's try and be civil and explain what the hell we're talking about here from now on.
Just so we're clear, everything posted in the first post is from the book, sans the change to hiring wizards.
OK
You are either referring to Utgardloki's tiny post or to my ginormous post. <snip> ...Let's try and be civil and explain what the hell we're talking about here from now on.
Being that the response quoted was posted directly after Utgardloki's post, I thought it was pretty obvious what post what post was being responded to.
As for your original post, I don't dispute what the rules suggest (naturally, campaign specifics like magic item availability are up to the DM). My experience is that most DM's don't follow those suggestions, and I would advise against it.
You see that? This means even if you WANTED to sell all those potions of cure light wounds to the PCs, they only have a 75% chance of finding each one, probably rolling each time to avoid not finding another one. I would just have a decent stock on hand (1d4+1, increasing the die size and adding 1 for each larger community) of select potions, maybe cure light wounds and magic weapon. Regardless, this isn't going to replace a cleric. Letting your whole high-level party pour their GP into those potions can and will replace a healer. At high levels this eliminates fun entirely. No one is ever afraid to die because they just spend an ever decreasing fraction of the money you give them to not die. The 75% chance is kind of silly, but I don't believe the meaning of the rule should be discounted: You DON'T get to have whatever you want, whenever you want it.
1) How, EXACTLY, does this "eliminate" fun by making it so you don't have to rely on a healer to NOT DIE?
2) Have you EVER played a campaign above level 9? Potions are VERY LITTLE healing, the 4d8 is nothing compared to the +CL added to it from the Cleric himself. The only thing a potion or wand of cure critical guarantees you is 5 health.
The disconnect here is that fantasy portrays magic as Rare And Powerful.
D&D portrays magic as "Common and Reliable" and tries to make it balanced.
If you want to make magic Rare and Powerful, you are probably using the wrong system with Pathfinder.
You would need to simultaneously increase the effectiveness of the spells and make them MUCH less frequent in use.
And then tone down the magic item 'glowie christmas tree' problem.
I understand the appeal behind this (and why a thread on "I wanna do low magic fantasy" pops up here twice a week.) But using Pathfinder to do low magic fantasy is like using a backhoe to brush your teeth - by the time you get a backhoe expansion-geared down to work as a toothbrush, you've spent more work on this than you'd've done walking down to Walgreens and buying one.
As noxious (and as setting-jarring) as it is to have 7th level characters walking around with 50K or more in magic glowie adventuring gear, the encounters pretty much assume that those capabilities exist, and the reward mechanisms of Pathfinder are pretty solidly in line with the 'kick in the door, kill the encounter' play style.
I'm going to disagree, and add that you may have read far too much into what Utgardloki posted.
First off, ALL classes rely very heavily on magic items. You think your 10th level wizard is going to totally outshine the fighter when he has only gotten access to 16 spells above 1st level (see below)?
The divine/charisma casters are in a slightly better situation, but they still rely on items for combat or versatility.
Don't all classes benefit from ability enhancing items/spells?
The largest difference is going to be the crafters, but crafting takes time, materials, and money - all things that the GM has some ability to control. While a crafter could use his crafting purely for making his own character better, that is more of a personality issue of the player then a flaw in the game.
Another thing to keep in mind is that there are many other things that can represent character wealth besides magic items. Land, titles, buildings, followers, hirelings, contacts, etc. could all give benefits that no +1 codpiece is every going to equal.
Once you hit around 12-15 level, the characters are going to have some kind of access to super transportation. If not from teleport or planeshift, then fast flying mounts, or simply owning a fleet of ships or international donkey caravans. Once you hit these levels, you will need more magic in the game to keep up with expected challenges. But at no point in the game do you need there to be a MagicMart in every city that has everything in the book, and a staff of 20th level crafters just waiting for some PC to stroll in with 3 tons of gold coin.
"Spells Gained at a New Level: Wizards perform a certain amount of spell research between adventures. Each time a character attains a new wizard level, he gains two spells of his choice to add to his spellbook. The two free spells must be of spell levels he can cast. If he has chosen to specialize in a school of magic, one of the two free spells must be from his specialty school."
The vast majority of magic in this game is created by DMs who think it will be cool. They're not so different from players after all.
The economy doesn't work and if a player wants to break the game they will.
Players and DMs have to work together to enjoy an adventure. DMs should not get so wrapped up in their simulation that players are a 'threat'. Players should recognize that they share the game world with others, including the DM, and refrain from hammering the weak spots when they can enjoy the good bits.
What would be fun? Thats usually the best place to start and not a bad place to get to either.
What would be fun is if there was a point to a spellcaster knowing anything but battle spells/environmental spells. With the current system there isn't, and it makes no logical sense for wizards to sell their spells cheaply when they make more money through other means.
We shouldn't have to tolerate a game with "weak spots". Game design is easy, and modifications can be made to make the game run better. In this case, a proposition to make magic users matter in a global scale and be capable of establishing themselves within the setting is the general goal. As is, they make practically no money, meaning no magic items. Every caster I've seen make items has been a player who was soon tired of all of the tracking and whatnot involved. If they made some worthwhile dough, maybe they wouldn't feel that way.
And every time I hear a DM complain that the characters are abusing the rules, well, here are some better ones, IMO to prevent abuse. Not all players are responsible. Some players I knew in 3.5 would abuse the rules to the point of the game not being fun, often due to these exact rules and the DM being too lazy to disallow them buying anything they wanted. This is damage control for a broken system in an otherwise efficiently revamped game, and a way for spellcasters to, well, compete and have fun making money.
Not working to fix something because it doesn't work...
In order for the game to make perfect sense a lot things would have to change. It's not worth the time and effort to make a perfect simulation*. The game would be too complicated. Accept the game for what it is. If your players are trying to game the system just tell them no.
It is also nigh impossible.
PS: The reason there are combat spells is because it is a combat based game. I am sure there would be spells that did not involve combat, but who want to RP cleaning the house, or cooking the food to the extent of wasting a spell slot to have it done.
You see that? This means even if you WANTED to sell all those potions of cure light wounds to the PCs, they only have a 75% chance of finding each one, probably rolling each time to avoid not finding another one. I would just have a decent stock on hand (1d4+1, increasing the die size and adding 1 for each larger community) of select potions, maybe cure light wounds and magic weapon. Regardless, this isn't going to replace a cleric. Letting your whole high-level party pour their GP into those potions can and will replace a healer. At high levels this eliminates fun entirely. No one is ever afraid to die because they just spend an ever decreasing fraction of the money you give them to not die. The 75% chance is kind of silly, but I don't believe the meaning of the rule should be discounted: You DON'T get to have whatever you want, whenever you want it.1) How, EXACTLY, does this "eliminate" fun by making it so you don't have to rely on a healer to NOT DIE?
2) Have you EVER played a campaign above level 9? Potions are VERY LITTLE healing, the 4d8 is nothing compared to the +CL added to it from the Cleric himself. The only thing a potion or wand of cure critical guarantees you is 5 health.
I've seen high level parties fully heal themselves after every encounter with wands/scrolls of cure light wounds, and ones without a rogue or bard do the same with potions. Sure, the cleric is more convenient, but the only reason clericzilla exists is DMs letting players buy their healing in this way, meaning the cleric doesn't have to use more than one or two slots to heal.
Economically speaking, I see a lot of people buying cure mod potions, since the average healing is 12 points for 300 gp. The most economical is the potion of cure light wounds at 50, and its low cost sees a lot of exploitation, since you would never get one potion of cure moderate wounds when you could get six potions of cure light wounds for the same price.
I am running two campaigns above level 9 right now, thank you very much. And when I played heavily we used this exploit all the time. As a druid I got to keep literally every spell I had because we would just stock a ton of clw potions and wands (The DM restricted the wands, smart guy). After every encounter everyone was healed. We ran through a pretty large dungeon without resting due to this, and bought one more wand afterwards, in case the first one ran out. We got around 30k from the dungeon, so this was nothing. Nothing. Even if we had bought 50 potions it would have been 2500 gp, a lot more but it could be used when I was out. Crafting wands would have made it even sillier, but no one wanted to take the tiny xp hit and a feat.
And high level parties do not need this level of healing. They don't. Almost half the classes have healing ability (and one that doesn't can use scrolls and wands), and if your party has none of those, your strategy should be a blitzkrieg to minimize damage. And it will work. Multifighter parties were laughed at pre pathfinder, and I can now imagine those laughs turning to screams of terror as the fighter vital strikes them for 40+ damage every round. Four fighters with maybe a few potions to overcome DR (Like they need to) and some light healing should be able to beat a variety of encounters, especially if one is Green Arrow (An archer with a wide variety of arrows). High level barbarians, rangers and arcane casters are fairly hit and run or don't engage directly. Rogues can do things like quaff a potion of invisibility, move into flanking round one and then mop up round two. In general the fighter takes all the hits, but if he only gets hit for one round and decides to ready an attack vs approach rather than charge and die, he'll take a lot less damage. If everyone is ranged capable it's also a big help.
Let's look at a CR 13 guaranteed to dish out tons of damage. The iron golem. DR 15/Adamantine, two slams at +28 that deal 2d10 +16 and have a high chance to crit, and good (28) armor class. Plus a free breath attack that could keel over a monk or whatever that's approaching it. Blitzkrieging it, assuming no druid to end the encounter with rock to mud, The fighter deals around 25 damage per attack. Letting it approach is, in this case, a bad move. All fighters charge the golem. Any spellcasters with good initative throw on a buff to the allies. Even with it's good hp, the golem hits the floor in six attacks. So two melee fighters charge it, the golem makes two attacks, and then they each get three attacks on it. If four of those attacks hit (assuming the charges hit), or they roll over average damage, the golem is toast. Lasted for one attack. That's not even counting the other three party members. If you want to do something fancy, like buff, this golem will eat you. Its attack bonus is so high that it auto-hits almost everyone. If you have a caster who knows his lore and has a lightning spell it's slowed.
Two rounds is how long the average encounter (assuming it's not at a range) with a single creature lasts. Potions in that combat even do not really matter. Out of combat, you are assumed to have at least a minute, unless you're in something truly nefarious (Like a clock tower dungeon I designed where the rooms were in between cogs). That's enough time to down ten potions or try to activate the wand 10 times. The DM is going to have to scale his encounters up to exhaust your giant supply of potions, let you rest, then do his actual encounters. If you have a reasonable amount of them (Especially when supplementing a healer), this ugly thing does not need to happen and we can all get on with the game. In general, it is inconvenient for the DM to have to force you to heal every encounter instead of just playing his encounters out to be challenging and fun. In some cases, the players are wasting everyone's time by doing this.
DM solutions to this problem are sadly few. The one half from me half from the book is likely the most effective, with each potion having a 75% chance of appearing until the roll fails. Otherwise you can have the party fight a black dragon and let him spoil a decent chunk of their potions while hitting and running. Stopping it at the source by limiting the number of available potions makes even cure moderate and up potions valuable and is in general a much more satisfactory solution to a big problem in 3.5.
In order for the game to make perfect sense a lot things would have to change. It's not worth the time and effort to make a perfect simulation*. The game would be too complicated. Accept the game for what it is. If your players are trying to game the system just tell them no.
It is also nigh impossible.
PS: The reason there are combat spells is because it is a combat based game. I am sure there would be spells that did not involve combat, but who want to RP cleaning the house, or cooking the food to the extent of wasting a spell slot to have it done.
I'm not asking for a perfect simulation. This was an argument to make casters feel more special and actually take non-combat spells instead of outsourcing them to magic support. I don't give a damn about cooking food and cleaning house (I've put a point into Profession (Domestic) before, and that saved a hell of a lot of time). When was the last time you had a party raise someone from the dead with their own cleric or druid? Why even have them in the party when you can just pay money for not having them there?
The game is already horribly complicated. Horribly. I taught four people to play Savage Worlds yesterday who will maybe need a bit more familiarity with the rules next week, since there was no combat. I taught people to play D&D three years ago and they had to supplement my game with d20 modern just to figure it out. They still slip up today since Pathfinder made a few rules tweaks. That SW group? Always remembered to roll their wild die, always remembered how to recover from staggered, etc. They needed very little handholding. Myself and another long time DM still mess up rules on occasion, and we've been playing for 7 and 11 years respectively, and DMing very often.
I don't want the game to make perfect sense. I don't want a perfect simulation. I want some damn roleplaying out of you people. If we can work at this and try some things out, we can always make things better. No way is it impossible. Pathfinder is living proof of that! Paizo made this system work, now I want the gameplay to work. I want there to be more than endless streams of combat. One where wizards are trying to make new spells to aid their friends, where the cleric is a bastion of faith in a godless land, and where the druid is both the embrace and fist of nature combined. Not where they all pretty much do the same thing: Make the bad guys fall down and manufacture cheap potions and wands.
I'm not asking for a perfect simulation. This was an argument to make casters feel more special and actually take non-combat spells instead of outsourcing them to magic support. I don't give a damn about cooking food and cleaning house (I've put a point into Profession (Domestic) before, and that saved a hell of a lot of time). When was the last time you had a party raise someone from the dead with their own cleric or druid? Why even have them in the party when you can just pay money for not having them there?
When your wealth per level quickly surpasses your ACTUAL access to resurrection spells AND your chance to die in any given combat, who would be stupid enough or even ABLE to resurrect their party member instead of paying out the money to have it done for them?
You see that? This means even if you WANTED to sell all those potions of cure light wounds to the PCs, they only have a 75% chance of finding each one, probably rolling each time to avoid not finding another one. I would just have a decent stock on hand (1d4+1, increasing the die size and adding 1 for each larger community) of select potions, maybe cure light wounds and magic weapon. Regardless, this isn't going to replace a cleric. Letting your whole high-level party pour their GP into those potions can and will replace a healer. At high levels this eliminates fun entirely. No one is ever afraid to die because they just spend an ever decreasing fraction of the money you give them to not die. The 75% chance is kind of silly, but I don't believe the meaning of the rule should be discounted: You DON'T get to have whatever you want, whenever you want it.1) How, EXACTLY, does this "eliminate" fun by making it so you don't have to rely on a healer to NOT DIE?
2) Have you EVER played a campaign above level 9? Potions are VERY LITTLE healing, the 4d8 is nothing compared to the +CL added to it from the Cleric himself. The only thing a potion or wand of cure critical guarantees you is 5 health.I've seen high level parties fully heal themselves after every encounter with wands/scrolls of cure light wounds, and ones without a rogue or bard do the same with potions. Sure, the cleric is more convenient, but the only reason clericzilla exists is DMs letting players buy their healing in this way, meaning the cleric doesn't have to use more than one or two slots to heal.
Economically speaking, I see a lot of people buying cure mod potions, since the average healing is 12 points for 300 gp. The most economical is the potion of cure light wounds at 50, and its low cost sees a lot of exploitation, since you would never get one potion of cure moderate wounds when you could get six potions of cure light wounds for the same price.
I am running...
....But people might not like not want to play like that. There have been many times I have posted a solution to an issue on these boards, but due to a refusal to change playstyle it would not work for that group. One of my best examples was the psionics thread about them novaing. All the DM had to do was stop running the game around a schedule the PC's setup, and the psion would not be able to use half of his PP's in one battle as an example. It is clearly not a big issue, only a theoretical one. If it is an issue for your group then maybe we can help, but I don't want the rule book size to double for something that is not giving most of us issues.
I'm not asking for a perfect simulation. This was an argument to make casters feel more special and actually take non-combat spells instead of outsourcing them to magic support. I don't give a damn about cooking food and cleaning house (I've put a point into Profession (Domestic) before, and that saved a hell of a lot of time). When was the last time you had a party raise someone from the dead with their own cleric or druid? Why even have them in the party when you can just pay money for not having them there?
What do you mean by make casters feel more special?
A put the thing about cooking in there because you mentioned noncombat spells. Either the spell will be combat based or it will have a "civilian" use. My players always have spells ready in case someone bites the dust, and if the NPC casters tried to jack up prices they would take the scribe scroll feat to make sure they had enough not to use them. What do you mean pay them for not being there? Are you suggesting that its a good idea to pay the most powerful classes to go away.
The game is already horribly complicated. Horribly. I taught four people to play Savage Worlds yesterday who will maybe need a bit more familiarity with the rules next week, since there was no combat. I taught people to play D&D three years ago and they had to supplement my game with d20 modern just to figure it out. They still slip up today since Pathfinder made a few rules tweaks. That SW group? Always remembered to roll their wild die, always remembered how to recover from staggered, etc. They needed very little handholding. Myself and another long time DM still mess up rules on occasion, and we've been playing for 7 and 11 years respectively, and DMing very often.
I don't think the game is that complicated, but to each his own I guess. I picked up the rules fairly quickly, and once I learned my DM did not know the meaning of the word mercy tactics were next. I am not saying everyone can pick the game up quickly since there are various factors such as actual playtime involved.
I don't want the game to make perfect sense. I don't want a perfect simulation. I want some damn roleplaying out of you people. If we can work at this and try some things out, we can always make things better. No way is it impossible. Pathfinder is living proof of that! Paizo made this system work, now I want the gameplay to work. I want there to be more than endless streams of combat. One where wizards are trying to make new spells to aid their friends, where the cleric is a bastion of faith in a godless land, and where the druid is both the embrace and fist of nature combined. Not where they all pretty much do the same thing: Make the bad guys fall down and manufacture cheap potions and wands.
How do the rules prevent RP'ing? I have had some excellent RP'ers in my group, and some bad ones, but even when we switched game systems(Star Wars Saga, Shadowrun, Mutants and Masterminds, etc) it did not change the player. Those who want to RP will, and those that don't won't. Not RP'ing is not a fault of the system. It is a fault of the player or group.
How do the rules prevent RP'ing? I have had some excellent RP'ers in my group, and some bad ones, but even when we switched game systems(Star Wars Saga, Shadowrun, Mutants and Masterminds, etc) it did not change the player. Those who want to RP will, and those that don't won't. Not RP'ing is not a fault of the system. It is a fault of the player or group.
Rules rarely ever prevent roleplaying. On the other hand, your on the game table experience is going to be the intersection of what the game system rewards and what the game master and fellow players reward.
The games that you listed are all combat heavy games, through and through. They're designed to let you run cinematic action adventure movies in different genres.
Game rules can definitely encourage roleplaying, however. d20 and its descendents (Star Wars Saga, Pathfinder, Mutants and Masterminds) don't have rules that encourage roleplaying; it's just supposed to *happen*.
If you want to see one example of a game system that encourages roleplaying - and which will result in much more interesting characters than you'll get out of D&D, check out this one:
It doesn't even make you learn a different die rolling mechanic...
How do the rules prevent RP'ing? I have had some excellent RP'ers in my group, and some bad ones, but even when we switched game systems(Star Wars Saga, Shadowrun, Mutants and Masterminds, etc) it did not change the player. Those who want to RP will, and those that don't won't. Not RP'ing is not a fault of the system. It is a fault of the player or group.Rules rarely ever prevent roleplaying. On the other hand, your on the game table experience is going to be the intersection of what the game system rewards and what the game master and fellow players reward.
The games that you listed are all combat heavy games, through and through. They're designed to let you run cinematic action adventure movies in different genres.
Game rules can definitely encourage roleplaying, however. d20 and its descendents (Star Wars Saga, Pathfinder, Mutants and Masterminds) don't have rules that encourage roleplaying; it's just supposed to *happen*.
If you want to see one example of a game system that encourages roleplaying - and which will result in much more interesting characters than you'll get out of D&D, check out this one:
It doesn't even make you learn a different die rolling mechanic...
Encouraging RP'ing wont make me enjoy if I just want to kill things though. That is the point I was making with the different systems, and the players. If I want to RP then I will.
@ everyone-->Sometimes you just have to accept players as who they are. Some grow into RP'ing while some never learn to care for it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Encouraging RP'ing wont make me enjoy if I just want to kill things though. That is the point I was making with the different systems, and the players. If I want to RP then I will.
Sure it will.
PC: "I attack." *roll dice* "I'd've hit a 24. For 9."
GM: "Hey, if you describe something cool for your attack, I'll give you a damage bonus."
One turn later:
PC: "I swing my sword at his head, and at the last minute, switch it to a low line shot when he raises his shield." *roll dice" "I'd've hit a 21. Um, 9 points."
GM: "Make that 11 points for the cool description."
If all you want to do is roll dice and kill things without carrying your part of the load of keeping everyone entertained, I'll ask what I can do to draw you in. If the answer is 'nothing', I'll ask you to leave - better for both of us.
Encouraging RP'ing wont make me enjoy if I just want to kill things though. That is the point I was making with the different systems, and the players. If I want to RP then I will.
Sure it will.
PC: "I attack." *roll dice* "I'd've hit a 24. For 9."
GM: "Hey, if you describe something cool for your attack, I'll give you a damage bonus."One turn later:
PC: "I swing my sword at his head, and at the last minute, switch it to a low line shot when he raises his shield." *roll dice" "I'd've hit a 21. Um, 9 points."
GM: "Make that 11 points for the cool description."If all you want to do is roll dice and kill things without carrying your part of the load of keeping everyone entertained, I'll ask what I can do to draw you in. If the answer is 'nothing', I'll ask you to leave - better for both of us.
Doesn't White Wold produce an entire line of games for this instead of shoe-horning it into D&D for "RP's sake" because you don't like just dungeon crawling.
Doesn't White Wold produce an entire line of games for this instead of shoe-horning it into D&D for "RP's sake" because you don't like just dungeon crawling.
Nah, those are for people who wanna play in an Anne Rice book.
*grin* (I prefer Minimus anyway.)
The Original Poster's contention is that they want an uncommon magic item game and want to do it in Pathfinder. Myself and several other posters pointed out that this is problematic. Pathfinder assumes money will be spent on stat buff items and +2 swords, armor, shields, etc.
Then someone else said that that only happens if you optimize, then we diverted to 'you can optimize and still roleplay'.
My contention is that the party of players wandering around with a bajillion magic glowie toys isn't doing anything wrong; they're playing Pathfinder the way Pathfinder was designed to be played.
That the 'roll' vs 'role' dichotomy is a false one - it all comes down to which reward mechanism you, as a player, go for. Whether it's 'I want a +5 Vorpal Falchion to be more effecient at putting down bad guys' or 'I want to roleplay my Dwarven rogue with a Spanish accent, and say "Hello, my name is Thorgrim Gunnerson of the Bronze Mountains. You killed my father. Prepare to die.', it's really a question of what kind of reward you're looking for from the game.
And you can tie the two reward mechanisms together.
When your wealth per level quickly surpasses your ACTUAL access to resurrection spells AND your chance to die in any given combat, who would be stupid enough or even ABLE to resurrect their party member instead of paying out the money to have it done for them?
Well, it's not like people get raised from the dead every day. It does require a giant diamond, after all (Or a two level lower druid with his oils...). Unlike most adventurers, clerics do not tend to have those just lying around. So no one, in either scenario, is coming back to life at level 5 without the whole party shelling out some time/money. My scenario just makes the investment 450 gp more expensive.
....But people might not like not want to play like that. There have been many times I have posted a solution to an issue on these boards, but due to a refusal to change playstyle it would not work for that group. One of my best examples was the psionics thread about them novaing. All the DM had to do was stop running the game around a schedule the PC's setup, and the psion would not be able to use half of his PP's in one battle as an example. It is clearly not a big issue, only a theoretical one. If it is an issue for your group then maybe we can help, but I don't want the rule book size to double for something that is not giving most of us issues.
The point of this thread is an argument for playing in a way that makes some sense in the in-game world. I try to give even the individual vendors the PCs buy from a bit of personality unless we're in a rush and they just needed 50 ft of rope. If they have class levels? Hoo boy. I've had players pass NPCs with more backstory than them while out on a stroll. When they met them later at the royal tourney, they kind of recognized them and wished them a good fight. The general purpose of this argument is to illustrate how anti-fantasy the concept of commericialized magic is. If it was Shadowrun, then it works very well. But in my western fantasy games, no. There are, believe it or not, more important people than your party, and they have more money than you. High level wizards/clerics are going to spend their time working for those guys. You? Not worth their time unless you roleplay your way in.
What do you mean by make casters feel more special?
A put the thing about cooking in there because you mentioned noncombat spells. Either the spell will be combat based or it will have a "civilian" use. My players always have spells ready in case someone bites the dust, and if the NPC casters tried to jack up prices they would take the scribe scroll feat to make sure they had enough not to use them. What do you mean pay them for not being there? Are you suggesting that its a good idea to pay the most powerful classes to go away.
Fly, for example, is a good spell game design wise. I have seen wizards not take it because they can just get a scroll of it. Besides the fact that fly is awesome, it's flying. Unless you went to the low wisdom wizard's school where the academic dean told you to prohibit transmutation, you want this. This kind of thinking doesn't make casters more powerful in my mind. It makes them lame. It would be like if everyone could have all the fighter's feats and his BAB temporarily by paying gold. It feels like that level of cheapness.
My singular house rule (That I don't use... yet.) only affects the prices of spells for hire, it doesn't touch scrolls.
By pay for them not being there, I mean you can pay to pretend your party had enough sense to have a cleric/caster along. There are some cases where this is a good plan. But having high level casters pop out of the woodwork who just so happen to have the spell you wanted prepped right away? Don't they have anything else to do? Did they scry on you while your character was musing, "Gee, I wonder if there's anyone around who can cast 'Summon Bigger Fish' so I can crush this gold statue into a manageable shape?" They must've flipped out and thrown their crystal orb down the stairs and screamed "Yes! At last, the moment I have been waiting for! Today, I fulfill my purpose in this world! I'm that guy who got Summon Bigger Fish in college! Oh happy day!" He runs over to a portrait of a wizard. "And you said I would never amount to anything!" He flicks a magic dart between the portrait's eyes. "Suck it, Mordenkainen!"
Why would you ever even buy a scroll when the price for the caster to come rub it on you is less than half? The question the caster should be asking is: Why should I get less from this guy who wants service right now then I would get for something I can do any time? Think of it like buying a TV dinner versus buying a fresh sandwich. The TV dinner costs 2 dollars and the sandwich costs 3. The TV dinner can be sold anytime, and the sandwich has to be specifically ordered.
I don't think the game is that complicated, but to each his own I guess. I picked up the rules fairly quickly, and once I learned my DM did not know the meaning of the word mercy tactics were next. I am not saying everyone can pick the game up quickly since there are various factors such as actual playtime involved.
See, I have played a lot of games aside from D&D. Compared to GURPS and HERO it's not complicated, but that's like saying that the stars are not bright compared to looking at an atom bomb detonating. Most people do not know a lot of the rules to D&D. Most people who play it do not know all the rules. This is why you keep the book nearby. You know what I keep the book nearby for when running Savage Worlds? Combat. With D&D it's every time someone casts a spell (That isn't fireball, point to you), or a new magic item is found, or we think Pathfinder changed this feat/skill, or...
Regardless, compared to even Shadowrun it's not complicated. A game with cybernetics, dragons, political backstabbing and the internet is out complex'd by the world's oldest game. Then again Shadowrun 3E combat was very simple: You are dead. Make a new runner.
How do the rules prevent RP'ing? I have had some excellent RP'ers in my group, and some bad ones, but even when we switched game systems(Star Wars Saga, Shadowrun, Mutants and Masterminds, etc) it did not change the player. Those who want to RP will, and those that don't won't. Not RP'ing is not a fault of the system. It is a fault of the player or group.
Those that won't, won't. I'm just arguing for roleplaying something that is fairly bizarre by itself and that was roleplayed in prior editions. The rules in this case do not encourage roleplaying. My addition to the rules might, at least, encourage roleplaying to bring the costs down from more fiscally minded groups. In general, however, using this elementary process to get people to roleplay finding powerful casters if their party doesn't have one is going to enhance roleplaying. Plus, getting on good terms with the guy or having him to sell valuable artifacts to is not a bad thing. Getting players involved with your world and making the party casters feel more appreciated is worth a slight tweak to the rules in my opinion.
Encouraging RP'ing wont make me enjoy if I just want to kill things though. That is the point I was making with the different systems, and the players. If I want to RP then I will.
Sure it will.
PC: "I attack." *roll dice* "I'd've hit a 24. For 9."
GM: "Hey, if you describe something cool for your attack, I'll give you a damage bonus."One turn later:
PC: "I swing my sword at his head, and at the last minute, switch it to a low line shot when he raises his shield." *roll dice" "I'd've hit a 21. Um, 9 points."
GM: "Make that 11 points for the cool description."If all you want to do is roll dice and kill things without carrying your part of the load of keeping everyone entertained, I'll ask what I can do to draw you in. If the answer is 'nothing', I'll ask you to leave - better for both of us.
Making me leave still wont make me enjoy it. If all I care about is how much damage I do there is nothing you can do to change it. There is also the fact that some people dont feel comfortable describing things or changing their voice to match the character. They feel goofy(could not think of a better word, so I stand by the assertion that a game can't change the player. The player has to want to be a roleplayer.
As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.PS: Carrying my part of the load is subjective.
Fly, for example, is a good spell game design wise. I have seen wizards not take it because they can just get a scroll of it. Besides the fact that fly is awesome, it's flying. Unless you went to the low wisdom wizard's school where the academic dean told you to prohibit transmutation, you want this. This kind of thinking doesn't make casters more powerful in my mind. It makes them lame. It would be like if everyone could have all the fighter's feats and his BAB temporarily by paying gold. It feels like that level of cheapness.
Maybe they don't care for the spell. Everyone has spells that catch their eye, and others that don't. I don't think it's worth getting bothered over. I like disintegrate, but I won't try to change the game if my players don't take it. I know it is not the most optimal spell, and even if it was it is their character. Not agreeing with my decisions of what to take is up to you(the player). The only thing that matters is did you have a good time. I will point out I run a rough game so if you die because I suggested spell X and you ignored me that is on you(player).
Just because those NPC's are high level that does not they wont do things. Lawyers make more money than I do, but they will still take my money. They have to make a living too. The payment can also come in the form of a favor if the NPC does not need money. I am not seeing your issues in other people's games. You make it seem as though your players ignore everyone(NPC's)
If you want to show your players that NPC X is important then have them need him for something, other than that he/she is just another person. By the time most players get to the point, where they need a high level NPC they should(assumption on my part) have made enough contacts to get those things anyway.
As for buying scrolls I keep them because I don't like depending on other people. I don't play my casters(when I DM) as always having the right spell prepped. Sometimes I tell the players to come back tomorrow or whenever its convenient depending on who the NPC is. I know everyone does not do that, but it adds a certain amount of realism to the game.
If the rules try to enforce RP'ing and the players don't want it they will try to do the minimal to get by, and do it begrudgingly. You will know they are faking it so nobody will really be happy.
I do see your point, but trying to make interaction fun is more of the answer than trying to use the rules to force players to do it.
When your wealth per level quickly surpasses your ACTUAL access to resurrection spells AND your chance to die in any given combat, who would be stupid enough or even ABLE to resurrect their party member instead of paying out the money to have it done for them?Well, it's not like people get raised from the dead every day. It does require a giant diamond, after all (Or a two level lower druid with his oils...). Unlike most adventurers, clerics do not tend to have those just lying around. So no one, in either scenario, is coming back to life at level 5 without the whole party shelling out some time/money. My scenario just makes the investment 450 gp more expensive.
I don't see where what you said had anything to do with what I said.
I think there is a difference between magic being rare in the setting and magic being rare, for adventurers. Adventurers see more gold and magic than most common people will ever even dream of, because they are risking their lives to poke into ancient tombs and cross blades with villains that the inn keeper or the farmer or drover would never have to deal with.
Ancient Greece wasn't a "high magic" setting because Perseus had a bunch of artifacts during his adventures, for example.
Yes, d20 fantasy assumes that, at times, the PCs can buy magic items, not be given clues to where they are by the gods (or not just getting them that way), but the fact of the matter is, you really don't have to explain why not everyone has a +2 longsword, because only the handful of people that are adventurers will ever have enough gold to go to the temple or the crazy old wizard to buy one.
Assuming that the baseline society has to be high magic because the rules assume adventures to have a certain amount of magic by a certain level is like assuming that everyone in Indiana Jones' world has come across powerful ancient relics (he does all the time), or that everyone in the Star Wars universe has seen a lightsaber (all the major characters in the films have).
The best way to reinforce that the experiences of adventurers are not common, if you wish to do so, is to have some "normal" NPCs that can present the setting from their point of view, in a compelling manner, to bring home how much of a gap there is between the world of adventurers and the world's common people.
I don't see where what you said had anything to do with what I said.When your wealth per level quickly surpasses your ACTUAL access to resurrection spells AND your chance to die in any given combat, who would be stupid enough or even ABLE to resurrect their party member instead of paying out the money to have it done for them?Well, it's not like people get raised from the dead every day. It does require a giant diamond, after all (Or a two level lower druid with his oils...). Unlike most adventurers, clerics do not tend to have those just lying around. So no one, in either scenario, is coming back to life at level 5 without the whole party shelling out some time/money. My scenario just makes the investment 450 gp more expensive.
That's because I have no idea what your post meant and was winging it.
I think there is a difference between magic being rare in the setting and magic being rare, for adventurers. Adventurers see more gold and magic than most common people will ever even dream of, because they are risking their lives to poke into ancient tombs and cross blades with villains that the inn keeper or the farmer or drover would never have to deal with.
Ancient Greece wasn't a "high magic" setting because Perseus had a bunch of artifacts during his adventures, for example.
Yes, d20 fantasy assumes that, at times, the PCs can buy magic items, not be given clues to where they are by the gods (or not just getting them that way), but the fact of the matter is, you really don't have to explain why not everyone has a +2 longsword, because only the handful of people that are adventurers will ever have enough gold to go to the temple or the crazy old wizard to buy one.
Assuming that the baseline society has to be high magic because the rules assume adventures to have a certain amount of magic by a certain level is like assuming that everyone in Indiana Jones' world has come across powerful ancient relics (he does all the time), or that everyone in the Star Wars universe has seen a lightsaber (all the major characters in the films have).
The best way to reinforce that the experiences of adventurers are not common, if you wish to do so, is to have some "normal" NPCs that can present the setting from their point of view, in a compelling manner, to bring home how much of a gap there is between the world of adventurers and the world's common people.
Here's the thing: I don't view adventurers as uncommon people. Not to say that everyone is an adventurer, but they're not the only fighters ever. There are schools full of them. Wizards and sorcerers are probably the most "rare" out of the classes IMO since you can't just choose to be one (And arguably the same for a cleric or druid, you have to be "called") and those of them who do apprenticing probably only do one or two at a time. I like to remind my players that if things had gone differently they could have been a farmer, and if they hadn't sharpened their endurance and their wits, that blow would have killed them.
It sounds more to me like you're describing nobility than adventurers in the last paragraph. Unless you're talking about the metric ton of magic items. Then yes I would agree on showing you can't just solve all your problems with magic.
Maybe they don't care for the spell. Everyone has spells that catch their eye, and others that don't. I don't think it's worth getting bothered over. I like disintegrate, but I won't try to change the game if my players don't take it. I know it is not the most optimal spell, and even if it was it is their character. Not agreeing with my decisions of what to take is up to you(the player). The only thing that matters is did you have a good time. I will point out I run a rough game so if you die because I suggested spell X and you ignored me that is on you(player).
Good point. I suppose I meant that I see players, in general, taking only the most objectly useful spells when building their character and not taking ones that could be useful. With a sorcerer I get this, but a wizard? I've seen wizards played that didn't have any utility to the party. Basically a glorified buff bot. Encouraging players to explore other options by making wizards for hire a bit more expensive will make their characters more useful in the long run.
Just because those NPC's are high level that does not they wont do things. Lawyers make more money than I do, but they will still take my money. They have to make a living too. The payment can also come in the form of a favor if the NPC does not need money. I am not seeing your issues in other people's games. You make it seem as though your players ignore everyone(NPC's)
If you want to show your players that NPC X is important then have them need him for something, other than that he/she is just another person. By the time most players get to the point, where they need a high level NPC they should(assumption on my part) have made enough contacts to get those things anyway.
Here's the thing: Yes, a good lawyer will work for you in today's economic model. And he charges more. But with a standard monarchy-run model this was not always the case. Letters of Mark (I believe they were called) completely restricted sales of a particular item. In a capitalistic economy or a socialist or communist economy, a powerful lawyer serving just anyone makes sense. In a monarchy model, he's likely only going to serve a sponsor unless given leave to do otherwise or if the money is good enough. Since magic users are valuable assets, the really good ones, like medieval writers, are going to be scooped up and sponsored by nobility, who may have their own ideas about letting him hire out his spells. Low level casters I can see. But higher level casters who don't live as hermits I can't. They're going to be regulated by decently powerful governments (Ones with a hint of brainpower anyway). My setting has very small nations (Around 300,000) and even they have laws in place to regulate the exchange of money for spellcasting. It is illegal to pay a spellcaster to harm a person, and the spellcaster and the beneficiary are guilty on both counts. Without such laws in place, people would fear spellcasters. Since they're on the list as a normal economic staple, like a repair guy, I can only assume that such laws do exist, and therefore that magicians of all creeds are regulated by law.
As for buying scrolls I keep them because I don't like depending on other people. I don't play my casters(when I DM) as always having the right spell prepped. Sometimes I tell the players to come back tomorrow or whenever its convenient depending on who the NPC is. I know everyone does not do that, but it adds a certain amount of realism to the game.
That's kind of what I'm trying to do, using arguments extracted from the rules. I don't think in some cases what I argue is the only way to play, I'm simply trying to analyze the world the rules present us with. I incorporate a lot of that into my setting as well. It is my opinion that magic is almost non-magical in D&D when high level spells are available to literally anyone. According to the chart, I can just go out and find a wizard powerful enough to cast wish if I have that kind of money (Honestly, 6300 gp? So much for the stuff of myth and legend, if a third level party pools together they can afford it). It doesn't even register to this chart that he may not exist. Maybe my setting has never had a 20th level wizard. Maybe it's never even had a 10th level character of any class. With that chart, disallowing this to players is supposed to be compared with saying that the taverns have no wine.
If the rules try to enforce RP'ing and the players don't want it they will try to do the minimal to get by, and do it begrudgingly. You will know they are faking it so nobody will really be happy.
I do see your point, but trying to make interaction fun is more of the answer than trying to use the rules to force players to do it.
I can see your point as well. I guess I want that kind of sale to be more like a privilege extended from knowing such a great guy. That's something I think should be encouraged. If you don't know the guy, you have to pay out the nose for spellcasting. It's like knowing the king. He's probably liberal with the money, considering all the taxes he collects. If you do stuff he asks you specifically to do, you'll get more dough in the long run than if you answered his beck and call to perform a quest.
Plus, this is drawn from the fact that the rules do regulate roleplaying. Why shouldn't they? The way I see it, a roleplaying game should employ direction to the players, basically rules, to direct their roleplaying in directions the game has expected to be played. There were all sorts of fluff reasons why priests couldn't use edged weapons, but the actual reason was crunch. Kind of the same way with my argument. The casters can be more beneficial to the party using this alternate rule. As per the current rules, having one in group is very replaceable. Magic items are fine, but the list for buying spells equates them to merchants who sell magic spells to get buy. Who would NOT buy all their healing or permanency spells if they could? Why would anyone die from injuries ever when a cleric healing you is only 10 gp? In my opinion, this chart raises questions I don't think the game or its players should have to answer, and is a fantasy heartbreaker element that could be giving people the wrong direction in a typical fantasy setting. The spellcasters aren't really that special and amazing when you can get some guy to run up and cast spells for you. It's a disparity from every fantasy book I can think of, including most of the D&D ones. Remember when Raistalin didn't have a spell, so the party all chipped in and bought one? Remember when someone was dying of an illness, and a member of the group found someone who could heal them, and after he did he held out his hand and said "That'll be 280 gold"? Me neither.
Here's the thing: I don't view adventurers as uncommon people. Not to say that everyone is an adventurer, but they're not the only fighters ever. There are schools full of them. Wizards and sorcerers are probably the most "rare" out of the classes IMO since you can't just choose to be one (And arguably the same for a cleric or druid, you have to be "called") and those of them who do apprenticing probably only do one or two at a time.
Do you open and close your D&D games with "You are all pig farmers. Roll a farming check. See you next week."
Have to say I tried running low magic worlds..Chivalry and Sorcery was perfect for it..but my players hated the game in the end and we went back to 3.5