-When players go to purchase magic items and and they honestly expect the shop keep to accept over 500 pounds of coins dumped out of a bag of holding. As if the merchant is so dumb as to inflate the local market enough to jeopardize his own business and put his community into a recession. (not really a misconception of rules as a misconception of what a stable economy is. Can't really blame players though, since that's how it works by the RAW. The RAW for the D&D economy are pretty dumb.)
Since when have private individuals put 'the good of the local economy' before their own personal greed? I can't imagine any shopkeeper thumbing his nose at thousands of gold coins because of some esoteric concern about inflation in the real world, let alone in any game world.
Besides that, I'm not really sure why one merchant becoming extremely rich would necessarily spur on inflation or put that rich merchant's business in peril, but that's another discussion I guess.
Merchant : "What the frack are you doing? I can't take that! I have no place to put 10,000 silver coins, 20,000 coppers, and 5,000 gold coins! Do I look like I have a vault in here? Do I look like I have 10 sons to guard it 24 hours a day from the thieves guild?!?! Do I look like I can haul that by myself up to the Capital and put it into the King's Treasury? Get that crap out of my store and come back when you've got some nice small easily hideable gemstones, you cretins!"
And yes, I did have some players looking through 30,000 coppers trying to figure out a way to get them back to town.
-When players go to purchase magic items and and they honestly expect the shop keep to accept over 500 pounds of coins dumped out of a bag of holding. As if the merchant is so dumb as to inflate the local market enough to jeopardize his own business and put his community into a recession. (not really a misconception of rules as a misconception of what a stable economy is. Can't really blame players though, since that's how it works by the RAW. The RAW for the D&D economy are pretty dumb.)
Since when have private individuals put 'the good of the local economy' before their own personal greed? I can't imagine any shopkeeper thumbing his nose at thousands of gold coins because of some esoteric concern about inflation in the real world, let alone in any game world.
Besides that, I'm not really sure why one merchant becoming extremely rich would necessarily spur on inflation or put that rich merchant's business in peril, but that's another discussion I guess.
huh. Fireball tossing wizards don't stress suspension of disbelief, but a trickle down economic theory does?
Awesome. :)
Most aggravating rules misconception?
The idea that, if the DM is actively thwarting the rules to make them work, then that's somehow proof that the rules themselves must be well-written and do what they're supposed to be doing (unless, of course, you think that what they're supposed to do is be a hurdle to the DM).
|
What aggravating misconceptions about rules make you want to scream?
That you have to play RAW or you aren't playing correctly. Even worse that you don't know how to play or that you are not a "real" rpg gamer if you don't play RAW and know every rule by heart.
Even if you have 20 + years experience than the person claiming superiority.That bugs me a great deal.
|
Hide in Plain Sight.
Players who can't seem to balance their characters' power levels. (IE, this character's ridiculously OP, and their next one is useless)
People who think that they should know everything, if their knowledge check is high enough. (Sorry, but sometimes there's just NO WAY you can know stuff.)
The rules apply to players and DM equally (if you're being fair), but sometimes I have better ideas than my players do.
When the AC in the group has a 10-15 point spread between highest and lowest.
Monks CAN wear bracers of armor.
Player's who think that seeing an illusion means you have "interacted" with it an insist they now get a saving throw.
+1.
The only time this actually happens is if you have a gaze attack, the illusion is within range and the illusion is something that should be affected by it acting inappropriately.
Even if I say "I'm casting silent image, it's an illusion, it's not real," proceed to cast silent image, you spellcraft that it is indeed silent image I am casting, and my illusory bugbear is wearing a cloak with "I am an illusion, I am not real" stitched on the back, guess what. STILL no saving throw till you interact with it.
Since when have private individuals put 'the good of the local economy' before their own personal greed? I can't imagine any shopkeeper thumbing his nose at thousands of gold coins because of some esoteric concern about inflation in the real world, let alone in any game world.
Besides that, I'm not really sure why one merchant becoming extremely rich would necessarily spur on inflation or put that rich merchant's business in peril, but that's another discussion I guess.
Introducing a lot of gold into your own coffers isn't the problem, it's wanting to spend it locally that will trip you up.
People HAVING a lot of money doesn't cause inflation, that money flowing through the economy causes it. Leaving that gold to sit in his pocket and then introducing it slowly is how he'd get the most net worth out of it and minimize inflation, making it manageable.
It also depends if we're doing gold per pound or if there are other forms of monetary exchange happening.
In other words the merchant in this instance is just afraid of hitting the next highest income tax bracket.
The misconception that basic algebraic mathematics provide a sufficient tool with which one can effectively analyze the Pathfinder rule set.
Zo
The math guys have already defended that one*. We can start another thread on it if you like though.
*By defended I mean given the true reason behind the math breakdowns.
Players who read the description of a feat on the feat table and never bother to read the actual mechanics of the feat.
That one annoys me to no end. +1
|
Also, people who think they have a way to bypass the prerequisites for feats based on 'logic'. For instance, I played with a guy who, in 3.5 and Pathfinder both, ran a Centaur and insisted that he be able to use Spirited Charge and Ride-By Attack without first taking Mounted Combat or putting a rank in Ride. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the DMs allowed it.
Spirited Charge was actually allowed, not sure about Ride-By-Attack, (or that it would actually benefit a centaur), because they possess an equivalant ability. I want to say it was either in Savage Species or maybe the 3E FAQ. But really, why is that so wrong?
Also, people who think they have a way to bypass the prerequisites for feats based on 'logic'. For instance, I played with a guy who, in 3.5 and Pathfinder both, ran a Centaur and insisted that he be able to use Spirited Charge and Ride-By Attack without first taking Mounted Combat or putting a rank in Ride. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the DMs allowed it.Spirited Charge was actually allowed, not sure about Ride-By-Attack, (or that it would actually benefit a centaur), because they possess an equivalant ability. I want to say it was either in Savage Species or maybe the 3E FAQ. But really, why is that so wrong?
that was specifically allowed in 3.5 . I believe it was in savage species.
Also, people who think they have a way to bypass the prerequisites for feats based on 'logic'. For instance, I played with a guy who, in 3.5 and Pathfinder both, ran a Centaur and insisted that he be able to use Spirited Charge and Ride-By Attack without first taking Mounted Combat or putting a rank in Ride. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the DMs allowed it.
Man I really hate that! I've had several players try to do that as well. One of which succeeded once because I wasn't GM.
In the end though, it didn't really hurt anything. I just hate that many players think that, that is the norm, rather than a house rule.
@ Benchak the Nightstalker - Thanks for pointing that out. :D
@ Ross - Sorry about the misflag and thanks for the correction.
See no b&&#&y player rule. This is a good time to enact the "Get a Stick Rule."
Kakarasa is a fan of your work.
That you have to play RAW or you aren't playing correctly. Even worse that you don't know how to play or that you are not a "real" rpg gamer if you don't play RAW and know every rule by heart.
Even if you have 20 + years experience than the person claiming superiority. That bugs me a great deal.
I'm all in agreement with this as long as the players are informed of the house rules before making any significant choices. Most GM's I associate with have an approval list and/or written house rules list... it seems to help immensely IMO.
To the best of my knowledge, Savage Species was not a book allowed for use at the game in 3.5, and when we started playing Pathfinder (with new first level characters, as opposed to converting existing characters) it certainly wasn't allowed. My main issues with him taking these feats were that: 1) The feats require you to first take Mounted Combat, which he didn't (maybe Savage Species changed that for Centaurs, I've never seen the book); 2) He treated Ride-By Attack as Spring Attack and got pissy if we called him on it; 3) As written, the rules for either feat state you have to be mounted, so if the Centaur was riding an elephant (or some other huge beast) I wouldn't have a problem with it, but he wasn't.
What it boils down to is that that one specific player purposefully chose to play a non-standard race so that he could claim that he could do these things (based on 'logic') and that the GMs would cave and allow it. If they didn't, then the player was more than willing to waste the entire night scanning through dozens of books trying to find anything that he could claim would allow him to do what he wanted to.Maybe my example is not so much a rules misconception, but I have seen and heard of other people doing similar things because they assumed it was ok. This is just the one that I have personally seen.
I wonder if he would have applied the same logic to climbing a rope to get out of a dungeon and hoisting his body weight and gear up. It's only fair that the road goes both ways. I'm not 100% sure of the math here, but those arms carrying a half to 3/4 ton plus gear might struggle under logic. ;)
My solution to this was a little different. For potions and scrolls, I limited the number available at any given time...for example, my party was looking to buy some healing potions so I told them the brewer in the villiage only have five on hand--not too much of a stretch. With making magical weapons, it may be within the ability of the armorer in town "A" to create +1 or +2 masterwork items at most without enchantments.Most big purchases--magical gear--or large orders--multiple potions and scrolls (greater than five or so) had to be made in a decent sized city at least, and some extremes were only available in capital cities--enchantments for gear requiring a +4 or +5.
Admittedly I wasn't thinking of the effect on an econemy, I was more thinking that a small village smithy would not have on hands the means to make some of the more extravagent items--a vorpal sword probably isn't being created by a man in a village with a population of 50.
I was actually referencing a very specific incident that happened in one of my campaigns where the players walked over to a shop they had heard was having a sale on (mostly minor) magic items because of a holiday. The holiday was essentially a great monster hunt in the name of the god of the hunt. They walked into the room and dumped out a handy haversack, a bag of holding, and a mundane sac on the floor and said "What can we get for this?" (it was 534 pounds of coins and most of it was gold). I handled it by asking the PC's for a favor (guard me on my way to place x, where I will then make an appropriate investment, then guard me on my return trip).
The economy of D&D breaks down further when you realize that nearly every single purchase the PC's ever make will be at such a high amount of gold that it must be introduced slowly in the market. So every single shop they go to is supposed to have a pile of gold somewhere that they are slowly draining over time. Multiply this by the number NPC's over a certain level and you have a world where every magic shop has a secret stash of platinum and gold (of varying sizes) that they can not spend because of the arbitrary cost of mundane things meant to cater to a world where level determines wealth and success and most people are level one.
The economy of D&D breaks down further when you realize that nearly every single purchase the PC's ever make will be at such a high amount of gold that it must be introduced slowly in the market.
Not so. Just like folks such as wizards can violate the laws of physics, which in D&D aren't really laws but more like friendly suggestions, so to are D&D economics influenced by ambient fantasy energies. Thus, no matter what monetary policies are used, no matter what Keynesian programs are implemented, et cetera, everything just chugs along just fine, unlike what happens in the real world, when Keynesian interference with the market causes inflation, drives up unemployment, et cetera. :)
My number one rules misconception is that the DM has to abide by all the same rules the players do. This is sort of a subset of MrFishy's no b&&#&y player rule.
The economy of D&D breaks down further when you realize that nearly every single purchase the PC's ever make will be at such a high amount of gold that it must be introduced slowly in the market.Not so. Just like folks such as wizards can violate the laws of physics, which in D&D aren't really laws but more like friendly suggestions, so to are D&D economics influenced by ambient fantasy energies. Thus, no matter what monetary policies are used, no matter what Keynesian programs are implemented, et cetera, everything just chugs along just fine, unlike what happens in the real world, when Keynesian interference with the market causes inflation, drives up unemployment, et cetera. :)
Here comes the dragons. They save puny humans economy by hoarding gold and preventing inflation that would otherwise threaten fantasy worlds because of abundance of gold.
And evil dragons are evil because they provoke dragon slayers causing their gold to return to human market and topple local economies because doing so.
My number one rules misconception is that the DM has to abide by all the same rules the players do. This is sort of a subset of MrFishy's no b&&#&y player rule.
GM determines outcome of all PCs interaction with the world or world interaction with world. Rules are just suggestion for him how to resolve it when he does not want to take arbitrary decision. Thinking otherwise is one of the grossess misconceptions about RPG.
Jump rules always take something awesome and slow it down to a crawl.
Failure in climb checks is not the same as failure at anything else. A total party kill once resulted from a player not knowing that failing by less than 5 on a climb check did not mean that you plummeted to the ground.
Sunder? Let's have a finicky detailed subsystem so that no one uses it! Alternatively, let's slow combat down to a crawl!
Grapple, the only rule so complicated that it requires flow charts.
Sneak attack and illumination rules combine to a headache.
Illumination rules do not lend themselves to an improvised encounter.
Interaction with illusions. Often a problem.
Ability checks are basically random luck as the d20 is going to swamp any bonus or penalty you're going to be using, making a strength check almost as random for Conan as it is for Sheldon. Yet module designers seem to think that they're valid tests of ability.
The worst offender is the old game of "What kind of action is it? Does it provoke?" It provokes my ire at the rules, yes. Favorite house rule has got to be: "If you have to ask, it's a move action that provokes."
|
|
-When players go to purchase magic items and and they honestly expect the shop keep to accept over 500 pounds of coins dumped out of a bag of holding. As if the merchant is so dumb as to inflate the local market enough to jeopardize his own business and put his community into a recession. (not really a misconception of rules as a misconception of what a stable economy is. Can't really blame players though, since that's how it works by the RAW. The RAW for the D&D economy are pretty dumb.)
Practically the only place that would sell the kinds of curios that would make an adventurer plot down 500lbs of gold coins is some sort of magical item shop. That's not pure profit either. Half that coin covered the cost to craft the item, and a good chunk of the rest goes to taxes, shop maintenance, protection money to the thieves' guild(or replacing items stolen by the thieves guild), and the general spending habits for a rich merchant who sells expensive magical items.
Essentially, any town that has a shop that sells such high-ticket items, is accustomed to the income those shops generate. If the shop doesn't sell its items regularly, it won't be in business for long. It's not like we're talking about some dirt farmer, in a tiny hamlet, that is selling a huge chunk of adamantine that fell straight from the heavens into his mud crop.
|
And then when the combat started and I requested inititive check... They all took 1d10 and rolled...
Me: Why did you used d10?!
They look on me very confused and say: Initiative is rolled with d10 in (A)D&D games.
The older farts among us might remember when Initiative was rolled on a d6... one roll for the WHOLE PARTY and one more roll for the monsters/opponents.
|
Rules Questions is for just that: A question about how a rule works, or what rule to use in a given situation. A discussion about rules belongs elsewhere.The fact that the rules forum takes so much space on this website :)Thought this more of a discussion, but I guess it could be rule questions... flagged myself. :) Really I was just looking to make a venting thread... no worries.
+1
Oh yea!
We were playing at a buddies house, and he ran BECMI only. I think it was Wrath of the Immortals, and we were fighting a demi-god (god?). My son, who was all of 14 at the time came for an evening since one of the other players was going to be missing. He rolled initiative for that battle. He rolled nothing but sixes the whole time, and that was with different dice. The DM was really po'd...
-- david
Papa.DRB
The older farts among us might remember when Initiative was rolled on a d6... one roll for the WHOLE PARTY and one more roll for the monsters/opponents.And then when the combat started and I requested inititive check... They all took 1d10 and rolled...
Me: Why did you used d10?!
They look on me very confused and say: Initiative is rolled with d10 in (A)D&D games.
|
|
People that do not RTFM.
Not so much a misconception about the rules as the root cause of so many misconceptions about the rules.
I have honestly had to say no more often to these types of players than those who know exactly how to break the system. Simply because said people know better than to ask me if they can play a Planar Shepherd.
You mean like the Advanced Players Guide?
Merchant : "What the frack are you doing? I can't take that! I have no place to put 10,000 silver coins, 20,000 coppers, and 5,000 gold coins! Do I look like I have a vault in here? Do I look like I have 10 sons to guard it 24 hours a day from the thieves guild?!?! Do I look like I can haul that by myself up to the Capital and put it into the King's Treasury? Get that crap out of my store and come back when you've got some nice small easily hideable gemstones, you cretins!"
Seems to me like :
Merchant: *eyes widen* "Would you kind gentlemen consider escorting me to the bank?"
Practically the only place that would sell the kinds of curios that would make an adventurer plot down 500lbs of gold coins is some sort of magical item shop. That's not pure profit either. Half that coin covered the cost to craft the item, and a good chunk of the rest goes to taxes, shop maintenance, protection money to the thieves' guild(or replacing items stolen by the thieves guild), and the general spending habits for a rich merchant who sells expensive magical items.Essentially, any town that has a shop that sells such high-ticket items, is accustomed to the income those shops generate. If the shop doesn't sell its items regularly, it won't be in business for long. It's not like we're talking about some dirt farmer, in a tiny hamlet, that is selling a huge chunk of adamantine that fell straight from the heavens into his mud crop.
The Core book (pg 405) says that the cost to live extravagantly is 1000 gp. Even if you made him pay twice that for some reason its still a negligible amount. So all that leaves is the cost of making items which, as you mentioned, is 50% profit. In other words, obsidian vaults lined with platinum with adamantine locks hidden in the basement, guarded by two shield guardians, and filled with unusable cash /exaggeration.
This is a little off the beaten path but one of of things that personal things that drives me crazy is something that I do myself: forget about or even assuming spells don't have expensive material components (especially for spells that don't seem like rituals- some of the illusion spells I'm bad about forgetting material components). Had to make a list of all the spells with such components so I wouldn't forget.
To the best of my knowledge, Savage Species was not a book allowed for use at the game in 3.5
By your group or in general? It was an official wotc product
and when we started playing Pathfinder (with new first level characters, as opposed to converting existing characters) it certainly wasn't allowed. My main issues with him taking these feats were that: 1) The feats require you to first take Mounted Combat, which he didn't (maybe Savage Species changed that for Centaurs, I've never seen the book)
The ability was quadraped or something. It specifically allowed you to skip the ride and mounted combat feat to go right to spirited charge ride by attack etc. It was both within the rules and very sensible: the centaur IS the horse. He doesn't need to learn how to ride any more than your character needs the skill "walk" in order to make a charge.
2) He treated Ride-By Attack as Spring Attack and got pissy if we called him on it
that ones different, both for the fact that you have to keep going the way you were comming, and that the feat as written often leaves you with no choice of anywhere to go except strait into the enemy depending on the orientation of the grid.
3) As written, the rules for either feat state you have to be mounted, so if the Centaur was riding an elephant (or some other huge beast) I wouldn't have a problem with it, but he wasn't.
-See, this is the sort of rules lawyering that drives ME nuts. 1) it does make sense that a man-horse can function as a man on a horse 2) the rules said he could.
What it boils down to is that that one specific player purposefully chose to play a non-standard race so that he could claim that he could do these things (based on 'logic') and that the GMs would cave and allow it. If they didn't, then the player was more than willing to waste the entire night scanning through dozens of books trying to find anything that he could claim would allow him to do what he wanted to.
... you mean trying to show you that he was adhering to the rules? handling it at the table is a bad call (the dm should make the call at the table, and then look it up later: email is great for that)
Maybe my example is not so much a rules misconception, but I have seen and heard of other people doing similar things because they assumed it was ok. This is just the one that I have personally seen.
Its a balancing act. You don't want to constrain creativity into a box" if you could program every possible rule and situation you'd have a computer, not a dm. On the other hand you don't want players creating water inside someone else's lungs or brain. Its a dance of concordant opposition, and sometimes its a mash pit...
Merchant : "What the frack are you doing? I can't take that! I have no place to put 10,000 silver coins, 20,000 coppers, and 5,000 gold coins! Do I look like I have a vault in here? Do I look like I have 10 sons to guard it 24 hours a day from the thieves guild?!?! Do I look like I can haul that by myself up to the Capital and put it into the King's Treasury? Get that crap out of my store and come back when you've got some nice small easily hideable gemstones, you cretins!"Seems to me like :
Merchant: *eyes widen* "Would you kind gentlemen consider escorting me to the bank?"
That's assuming there's a bank in the town. If you go by dark ages, there weren't banks like we think of them, and most towns didn't have the ones that were there.
Ye Olden Bank was usually either the king's treasury, where you dropped off some stuff and it was written in the kings rolls (and you hoped he was honest enough to give you back your stuff) and the king kept a percentage of what you deposited. Or, it was a rich merchant that had a well fortified building with mostly honest guards, and you paid for the privilage of storing things. Again though, those were in the largest cities only.
Ye Olden Bank was usually either the king's treasury, where you dropped off some stuff and it was written in the kings rolls (and you hoped he was honest enough to give you back your stuff) and the king kept a percentage of what you deposited. Or, it was a rich merchant that had a well fortified building with mostly honest guards, and you paid for the privilage of storing things. Again though, those were in the largest cities only.
or a temple. The templars paid for their wars with banking, temples are usually well secured permanent structures filled with people with good perception checks, not to mention that it takes a really low person to rob one.
-When players go to purchase magic items and and they honestly expect the shop keep to accept over 500 pounds of coins dumped out of a bag of holding. As if the merchant is so dumb as to inflate the local market enough to jeopardize his own business and put his community into a recession. (not really a misconception of rules as a misconception of what a stable economy is. Can't really blame players though, since that's how it works by the RAW. The RAW for the D&D economy are pretty dumb.)
Since when have private individuals put 'the good of the local economy' before their own personal greed? I can't imagine any shopkeeper thumbing his nose at thousands of gold coins because of some esoteric concern about inflation in the real world, let alone in any game world.
Besides that, I'm not really sure why one merchant becoming extremely rich would necessarily spur on inflation or put that rich merchant's business in peril, but that's another discussion I guess.
My solution to this was a little different. For potions and scrolls, I limited the number available at any given time...for example, my party was looking to buy some healing potions so I told them the brewer in the villiage only have five on hand--not too much of a stretch. With making magical weapons, it may be within the ability of the armorer in town "A" to create +1 or +2 masterwork items at most without enchantments.
Most big purchases--magical gear--or large orders--multiple potions and scrolls (greater than five or so) had to be made in a decent sized city at least, and some extremes were only available in capital cities--enchantments for gear requiring a +4 or +5.
Admittedly I wasn't thinking of the effect on an econemy, I was more thinking that a small village smithy would not have on hands the means to make some of the more extravagent items--a vorpal sword probably isn't being created by a man in a village with a population of 50.
I know it is not RAW, but I use the letters of credit from Eberron. You basically go to a bank and get a note that is equal to the value of the gold you turned in. Carrying around a lot of gold would seem to be a dangerous and cumbersome activity considering the cost of equipment.
To the best of my knowledge, Savage Species was not a book allowed for use at the game in 3.5By your group or in general? It was an official wotc product
For 3.0, not 3.5, if I recall correctly.
For 3.0, not 3.5, if I recall correctly.
To the best of my knowledge, Savage Species was not a book allowed for use at the game in 3.5By your group or in general? It was an official wotc product
It was either the last 3.0 product or the first 3.5 one (depending) it was certainly made with 3.5 in mind.
also the 3.0 to 3.5 was... what changed exactly? It was a very minor revision. More a collection of faq's and a few errata than a new edition. They're the exact same system.
For 3.0, not 3.5, if I recall correctly.
To the best of my knowledge, Savage Species was not a book allowed for use at the game in 3.5By your group or in general? It was an official wotc product
it was either the last 3.0 product or the first 3.5 one. It was certainly written with 3.5 in mind.
secondly there's no real difference between 3.0 and 3.5. it should have been called 3.05. They're the same edition as far as I'm concerned
Taking Sandpoint as the "prototypical sleepy coastal Pathfinder town" you would have no problem getting someone there to guarantee any number of transactions. There's a mercantile guild, a fortified municipal building, and the barracks. The Pathfinder setting even has the clergy of Abadar, who are indisputably a bank.
What's more, the RAW does account for flushing a town with cash. Each town statblock has a max purchase price, which is the most cash on hand for a town to buy goods from player loot. It doesn't get more explicit than that.
People who argue the realism of Pathfinder economies are missing two key points:
But since when is anything in Pathfinder medieval? The presence of swords does not equal a medieval society. In most regions, the Pathfinder setting (and therefor the assumptions in the CRB) is much closer either classical or renaissance culture, and still vastly different from either of those. Swords and banks can coexist, especially with magic.
Swords and banks can coexist, especially with magic.
If anything, access to extradimensional spaces makes banking more effective. When your vault is an easily hidden portable hole or a secret chest or even buried fairly swiftly with move earth, you don't even need a building to run a bank out of, except maybe to appear professional.
I know it is not RAW, but I use the letters of credit from Eberron. You basically go to a bank and get a note that is equal to the value of the gold you turned in. Carrying around a lot of gold would seem to be a dangerous and cumbersome activity considering the cost of equipment.
I do this as well, but, while they are more convenient, they do have draw backs. Not everyone accepts letters of Credit. Plus, a letter of credit for Kingdom A might not be accepted by anyone in Kingdom B. And so on. Often, the best way to carry cash is gems. A 50,000gp gem could fit in your pocket. Good luck getting 5,000pp's in your pocket. :)
@evil lincoln
You've fallen into a trap of your own. You are assuming that everyone here runs Golarian as their world. I don't. Many of us don't. So Sandbpoint doesn't exist in our worlds. Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not punting you for it. Just pointing out that your assumption is faulty. I do agree that the rules have a limit on how much wealth a town can handle by size, and that's great, I use it myself. However, that doesn't mean that everyone's world is Golarian or renesance.
The misconception that basic algebraic mathematics provide a sufficient tool with which one can effectively analyze the Pathfinder rule set.
Zo
The math guys have already defended that one*. We can start another thread on it if you like though.
*By defended I mean given the true reason behind the math breakdowns.
Would you be so kind as to provide a link to or the name of the thread in question?
Zo
See, this is the sort of rules lawyering that drives ME nuts. 1) it does make sense that a man-horse can function as a man on a horse 2) the rules said he could.
Said centaur can take Spring Attack rather than Ride-by Attack, or Power Attack rather than Spirited Charge, or Dodge (or any number of AC boosting feats) rather than Mounted Combat--just like every other non-mounted hero. These feats and others certainly give the same "feel" that the mounted feats would if they were allowed.
Players should not get special privileges just for playing a centaur. Playing a centaur AT ALL is in itself a privilege.
Also, if memory serves me, for every "official" rule saying that centaurs could take the mounted feats for themselves, there was another official rule specifically saying that they could not (I remember seeing references in one of the Forgotten Realms books).
What's more, I just went through the feat section of Savage Species as well as the Centaur section and I saw no such mention of quadrupedal creatures being able to utilize Mounted Feats without needing a mount.
@evil lincoln
You've fallen into a trap of your own. You are assuming that everyone here runs Golarian as their world. I don't. Many of us don't. So Sandbpoint doesn't exist in our worlds. Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not punting you for it. Just pointing out that your assumption is faulty. I do agree that the rules have a limit on how much wealth a town can handle by size, and that's great, I use it myself. However, that doesn't mean that everyone's world is Golarian or renesance.
Seems to a issue with your world not Pathfinder than.
Pathfinder has no problem with it: your world does.
@evil lincoln
You've fallen into a trap of your own. You are assuming that everyone here runs Golarian as their world. I don't. Many of us don't. So Sandbpoint doesn't exist in our worlds. Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not punting you for it. Just pointing out that your assumption is faulty. I do agree that the rules have a limit on how much wealth a town can handle by size, and that's great, I use it myself. However, that doesn't mean that everyone's world is Golarian or renesance.
Sort of, MDT.
(also no hard feelings)The Pathfinder RPG was created to support the Adventure Paths. The Adventure Path setting was created to be an "ideal" 3.5 setting.
The town creation rules in the CRB and GMG assume a golarion type world as a baseline. In my post, I was careful to distinguish between Pathfinder (game) and Pathfinder (Setting), as denoted by the word "setting" where applicable.
The CRB assumes a world like Golarion. You can certainly deviate, but when discussion things like town economies, the CRB and GMG are crystal clear. The adventure paths merely offer examples of those rules followed to their logical end.
Also, banks, like many institutions, are older than people think. Judging from common perception you'd think we went from bear skins directly to full plate armor.
from wiki
The first banks were probably the religious temples of the ancient world, and were probably established in the third millennium B.C. Banks probably predated the invention of money. Deposits initially consisted of grain and later other goods including cattle, agricultural implements, and eventually precious metals such as gold, in the form of easy-to-carry compressed plates. Temples and palaces were the safest places to store gold as they were constantly attended and well built. As sacred places, temples presented an extra deterrent to would-be thieves. There are extant records of loans from the second century BC in Babylon that were made by temple priests/monks to merchants.
People keep bringing up banks as if that helps any. I was under the assumption there would be banks. All this does is move the location of the wealth to more secure location. You can put the gold anywhere you want, it doesn't solve anything. That said, I really wasn't trying to derail this thread by bringing this up. If I have time I will start another thread about this topic, or someone else can start a thread about it if the want to, but we should really move on with the topic at hand in this thread.