All potions, scrolls, wands, and other consumables are made by wizards, clerics, or druids in Pathfinder Society Organized Play. The only exceptions are spells that are not on the wizard, cleric, or druid spell list.
This rule has lead me to lots of headache and frustration.
Here's a simple hypothetical situation: A Bard (an arcane caster) wants to purchase a scroll of Cure Light Wounds. However, as per PFS rules, the scroll must be scribed by a wizard, cleric, or druid if able. Wizards cannot scribe such a spell, but clerics and druids can. So any PFS scroll of Cure Light Wounds is either crafted by a cleric or druid (in other words it is divine). Now by RAW, a spellcaster can only use a scroll of the appropriate type.
The spell must be of the correct type (arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters (wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells, and divine spellcasters (clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers) can only use scrolls containing divine spells. (The type of scroll a character creates is also determined by his class.)
What does this mean? It means any Bard wanting to use a scroll of Cure Light Wounds in PFS must use UMD in order to do so. This is wrong.
__________________
On top of all that, the limit of wizard, cleric, and druid crafted items is actually a big nerf to UMD. Here's what I mean: Unless I want to make a second, more difficult UMD check to activate a scroll, I need to have the requisite ability score needed to cast such a spell in the first place. For example: if I want to use a 3rd level cleric scroll, I need at least a 13 Wisdom if I don't want to make that second UMD check. As a UMD user, it is usually the case that their Charisma is higher than either their Willpower or Intelligence. So in order to make best use of that Charisma, I would choose Charisma based classes (sorcerer, oracle, bard, paladin, or even summoner) to construct my scrolls, even if I have to pay a slight premium. Otherwise, my chances of successfully using a scroll drop dramatically. However, I don't get this option in PFS. So by default, my chance at UMDing a scroll drops dramatically.
I really don't like this ruling...
|
For Pathfinder Society, the prices for all consumables, such as scrolls, that use spells from the cleric/druid/wizard spell list are based on the cost of that item as made by a cleric/druid/wizard regardless of the class's spell list it is on. This means a bard can buy a scroll of cure light wounds at the cleric/druid/wizard scroll cost but still buy it as an arcane scroll of cure light wounds. This also means that a paladin can buy a scroll of lesser restoration at the cleric/druid/wizard scroll cost and still cast it as a paladin scroll.Scrolls that contain spells that do not appear on the cleric/druid/wizard list are made at the appropriate costs for their classes.
|
Perhaps, to better reflect the intent, it should be worded: "All ... consumables are priced as if made by wizards...."
And this rule is not arbitrary, and does serve a specific purpose. It standardizes the pricing for consumables - ie. no 1/3 cost consumables just because they were crafted by a paladin or ranger, or even cheaper for some crafted by bards. Similarly, it limits universal access to those 1st-level consumables found on the Wizard/Cleric/Druid lists.
On top of all that, the limit of wizard, cleric, and druid crafted items is actually a big nerf to UMD.Actually this bit is false.
It doesn't matter who made the item for you to UMD it.
An oracle can read a divine scroll of cure light wounds that was made by a cleric without check. Likewise when you emulate you can emulate being such an oracle.
That said, I've complained about this arbitrary rule ad nauseum. Departing from the core rules is never a help in organized play and this rule serves no purpose.
-James
I think you should reread the UMD rules. As far as scrolls are concerned, it is VERY important to know who created it. Hypothetical situations:
I have a bard with the stats- Str:14 Dex:16 Con:12 Int:10 Wis:10 Cha:16 Let's say he has a final UMD of +18. Now if he wanted to use a scroll of a 3rd level spell, he'd need to make a UMD check with a DC of 23- not too terrible. However, in order to use a scroll, the user must have a high enough stat in the requisite ability. If this was a cleric written scroll, that would necessitate a Wisdom of 13 to use that 3rd level scroll. My bard doesn't have a 13 Wisdom, though, so he needs to make a second UMD check (DC 28 this time) to emulate that ability score.On the other hand, if my bard used a 3rd level scroll from an Oracle, he would meet the requirement of having 13 Charisma, and thus would only need to make the single UMD check.
So I went from purchasing scrolls that I can use with a single DC 23 check to being forced to purchase scrolls that require both a DC 23 AND DC 28 check. That is a nerf, or I don't know what is.
Mediate, read the link axemurder0 linked to. This rule is more for pricing as others have noted in this thread as well.
AxeMurder0 and K Neil Shackleton, thanks for the info. Apparently, I can purchase ANY scroll from ANY caster, but I use the wizard, cleric, druid spell list for the pricing guide. But that still leaves me confused then.
I mean, the situation works fine when talking about a caster level 1, first level spell being transferred over to another caster level 1, first level spell (eg the cleric CLW becoming a bard CLW). But what about in cases that aren't so cut and dry?
Using my bard from my previous post, what if I wanted to purchase the 3rd level scroll of water breathing? Because of the reason's I mentioned in that last post, I would really, really like it if either the oracle or the sorcerer had scribed it for me.
Now I can easily purchase a scroll from a cleric or wizard at 375g. But according to Joshua, I can call that scroll I just bought a sorcerer or oracle scroll. But how does that work? Because I just bought a 5th caster level item, and sorcerers can't cast water breathing until 6th caster level.... Do I just handwave it? Do I have to purchase the scroll at 6th caster level (essentially using the sorcerer pricing guides) to say it is a sorcerer scroll?
And what happens if I, for instance purchase a haste scroll using the Wizards costs, and say it is a summoner's spell? I pay the 375g, yes. But for the purposes of UMD is it a 2nd level summoner spell, or a 3rd level spell that just happens to be labeled as a summoner?
|
|
I guess different people have trouble with different rules. While some other things bother me quite a bit this one seems both obvious and innocuous to me, although I do remember a plethora of posts on the subject when it was new.
Personally I find the PFS method much less confusing then letting wizards try and buy haste scrolls at Summoner pricing and later find out that they don't work due to a lack of CHA, or having players in the know buy things like Resist Energy from the Ranger List or Lesser Restoration from the Paladin list.
|
|
Merkatz, James is correct that you probably do not need UMD for most of what you want.
Bottom line - if you want an arcane scroll, you pay the wizard price. As long as it is on the bard spell list, the bard can use it without UMD.
EDIT: And for those bard spells which are on a cleric/druid list, but not a wizard list, you pay the c/d price but have an arcane version which you can cast without UMD.
|
With the number of threads related to this topic, I have not the time, nor inclination to search them all. Perhaps others with better search-fu can help with links.
First, as I recall, the origin of the scroll is hand-waved. Meaning it does not matter if it was crafted by a wizard, cleric, or whatever. As long as the spell exists on your spell-list then you can cast it without UMD. Of course, you must still follow the other minimum requirements, such as ability score, alignment, etc. If not, then you may need UMD. When a scroll is found as treasure, it is never identified as an arcane/divine item. It applies as both. The caster would determine the type based on their class.
Of course that varies a bit from PRPG core, but it does make it a bit easier to adjudicate scrolls in OP.
Second, regardless of people's view on the scroll pricing system, it is relatively easy to follow as long as you remember my prior point. If a spell exists on the wizard/cleric list, you must use that listing when determining price, even if the spell exists on another class's list.
One example is Lesser Restoration. It exists as a Cleric-2, and a paladin-1. All characters, even paladins, must purchase it as a scroll based on the cleric level 2 listing and pay 150gp.
Some will say this nerf's the pally. Some will complain that this is an unnecessary rule. It doesn't matter.
What matters is that the pricing for scrolls remains consistent for organized play. Despite a few dissenting voices in the forums, the general populace seems to be okay with this rule and the leadership is not likely to change it anytime soon, if ever.
|
|
First, as I recall, the origin of the scroll is hand-waved. Meaning it does not matter if it was crafted by a wizard, cleric, or whatever. As long as the spell exists on your spell-list then you can cast it without UMD. Of course, you must still follow the other minimum requirements, such as ability score, alignment, etc. If not, then you may need UMD.
As people are having trouble with the core rules, I feel I need to correct this at least as far as core rules go.
As an example, a bard cannot use (without UMD) a divine scroll of cure light wounds. Now for awhile posts by Josh on these boards were rules and he said that they could for PFS. This is no longer the case as far as I'm aware.
This is true for PRPG, but can you site a thread where this is clarified for OP? As I said, I am recalling the "hand waiving" from Josh's time and I do not remember seeing a change to that by Mark/Hyrum.
|
|
Second, regardless of people's view on the scroll pricing system, it is relatively easy to follow as long as you remember my prior point. If a spell exists on the wizard/cleric list, you must use that listing when determining price, even if the spell exists on another class's list.It's so easy to follow that you have it wrong here.
First a druid can buy scrolls of their own list even if they appear on the cleric/wizard list. The druid is not secondary to wizards and clerics here.
Secondly how much is a scroll of animate dead? Gentle repose?
And third, how much would an arcane scroll of speak with animals cost?
The first is simply an error on your part which speaks to how clear or unclear the rule really is. The second speaks to the same 'confusion' that this house rule supposedly solved as it falls into that same category. And the third I don't know the answer to because of this house rule, and I'd like to know as I can see three answers including the item is not allowable under this house rule.
As I recall, druid and any other class, would be considered a secondary casting class and default to the core OP ruling unless the spell does not exist on the wizard/cleric list. A druid is no different that a paladin, summoner, etc.
The confusion exists when the buyer cannot separate the purchase price from the use of the item.
The price (and only the price) determination for Animate Dead is that it exists on the Cleric list as a level three and the Wizard list as a level four. Assuming that my firs point is still valid (scrolls have no type), you can buy the scroll for 375gp which is the cheaper of the two. Again, this only applies to the purchasing price.
When the user goes to cast the scroll, THEIR class determines how the scroll would function. I.e. if I am a cleric, it would function as a 3rd level spell. If I am a wizard, it would act as a 4th level spell.
Again, this does not jive with how PRPG adjudicates scrolls, but my understanding was confirmed both at GenCon 2009 & again at GenCon 2010.
I do not recall there being any changes to this by Mark/Hyrum. If they exist, I missed them.
|
crafted by a paladin or ranger, or even cheaper for some crafted by bards. Similarly, it limits universal access to those 1st-level consumables found on the Wizard/Cleric/Druid lists.
There is a rule that only universal access can only be used for items on these lists? I understand the lesser restoration style ruling. It is not my understanding, nor would I understand it to be desirable, that a 1st level spell that never appears on a W/C/D list would be unavailable under universal access.
|
|
Here's a simple hypothetical situation: A Bard (an arcane caster) wants to purchase a scroll of Cure Light Wounds. However, as per PFS rules, the scroll must be scribed by a wizard, cleric, or druid if able. Wizards cannot scribe such a spell, but clerics and druids can. So any PFS scroll of Cure Light Wounds is either crafted by a cleric or druid (in other words it is divine). Now by RAW, a spellcaster can only use a scroll of the appropriate type.
There are a lot of threads on these boards, where former PFS jefe Joshua Frost tries to explain why the system works as it does.
However, the example you presented above was made null by the release of the Advanced Players Guide, wherein you will find the witch class - an arcane caster class that can cast cure light wounds.
|
|
It never made it into the guide...
Until recently, this was not a valid reason for not accepting forum rulings. However, with the recent change that all forum posts are to be treated as "suggestions" until they appear in the next Guide update, things have changed.
Suddenly, all the changes/clarifications that have been done on the boards, but not made it to the Guide, no longer apply. This can/will create a lot of confusion in the short term. Many of those ruling were being used by local groups and accepted as OP cannon. However, now they can be ignored.
I fully expect that version 4.0 will have a detailed and clear ruling on purchasing magic items, especially scrolls and wands which seem to invoke the most discussion.
If everyone agrees that the rules, as they exist, are confusing then I advise all players to consult their local GM's and/or Venture Captains for their interpretation.
|
|
crafted by a paladin or ranger, or even cheaper for some crafted by bards. Similarly, it limits universal access to those 1st-level consumables found on the Wizard/Cleric/Druid lists.There is a rule that only universal access can only be used for items on these lists? I understand the lesser restoration style ruling. It is not my understanding, nor would I understand it to be desirable, that a 1st level spell that never appears on a W/C/D list would be unavailable under universal access.
Sorry, Howie. You understand it correctly. I just meant that [ilesser restoration[/i] or hideous laughter, for example, would not be universally available as scrolls or potions, as they are not 1st level on the w/c lists.
1st-level ranger/paladin exclusive scrolls are available.
It never made it into the guide...Until recently, this was not a valid reason for not accepting forum rulings. However, with the recent change that all forum posts are to be treated as "suggestions" until they appear in the next Guide update, things have changed.
Suddenly, all the changes/clarifications that have been done on the boards, but not made it to the Guide, no longer apply. This can/will create a lot of confusion in the short term. Many of those ruling were being used by local groups and accepted as OP cannon. However, now they can be ignored.
I did not see the ruling by Mark and Hyrum this way. Rather, the way I read it, any rulings made [after] that post were to be treated that way and any official rulings made [before] that post are still official rules, especially any rulings made by Joshua that have not been directly changed by Mark and Hyrum.
|
|
I did not see the ruling by Mark and Hyrum this way. Rather, the way I read it, any rulings made [after] that post were to be treated that way and any official rulings made [before] that post are still official rules, especially any rulings made by Joshua that have not been directly changed by Mark and Hyrum.
It never made it into the guide...Until recently, this was not a valid reason for not accepting forum rulings. However, with the recent change that all forum posts are to be treated as "suggestions" until they appear in the next Guide update, things have changed.
Suddenly, all the changes/clarifications that have been done on the boards, but not made it to the Guide, no longer apply. This can/will create a lot of confusion in the short term. Many of those ruling were being used by local groups and accepted as OP cannon. However, now they can be ignored.
Hard to believe, since there have been several iterations of the PFSOP since Josh made that posting, but the guide doesn't contain the gist of that post.
From the latest version of the PFSOP, v3.03:
Purchasing Potions/Scrolls/Wands
All potions, scrolls, wands, and other consumables are
made by wizards, clerics, or druids in Pathfinder Society
Organized Play. The only exceptions are spells that are
not on the wizard, cleric, or druid spell list. For example,
a scroll of lesser restoration must be purchased as a
2nd-level scroll off the cleric spell list and may not be
purchased as a 1st-level scroll off the paladin spell list.
Cure Light Wounds, as a spell, is on both the Cleric & Druid spell lists, but NOT the Wizard spell list. Therefore, despite the fact that an arcane version of Cure Light Wounds is available on both the Bard and Witch spell lists, the only scrolls of CLW available, per a strict reading of the PFSOP, are Divine, never Arcane.
And, as James pointed out, this raises questions, still, on pricing for spells that appear at different levels on the three "primary" spell lists, Cleric, Druid & Wizard.
Just as an example, which is likely to be a spell needed for success for some higher level modules/scenarios, Plane Shift is on both the Cleric and Wizard spell lists, but at different levels. So, are all Plane Shift scrolls purchased at the 5th level Cleric scroll price, or the 7th level Wizard scroll price?
5th level: 1,125 GP
7th level: 2,275 GP
Along with the 1,150 GP difference, is that the recent clarification that this line "Spells that are 7th level or higher are not available
from spellcasting services." from the PFSOP applies to scrolls, as well, so it raises the question as to whether an Arcane Plane Shift is a legal scroll, since it is a 7th level Arcane spell...
To be honest, the initial discussion which prompted Josh to make this rule was about Lesser Restoration, and people gaming the system to be able to buy a wand of LR for 750 GP. However, issues like the effect on Plane Shift, which is frequently needed if an adventure requires moving between planes, makes the rule just as bad as not having it.
Before the rule:
Wands of Lesser Restoration @ 750 GP or 4,500 GP (without research)
After the rule:
Scrolls of Plane Shift:
Divine: 1,125 GP
Arcane: Not available, since it is 7th level
Scrolls of Cure Light Wounds:
Divine: 25 GP
Arcane: Not available, since it is not on the Wizard spell list, and other Arcane spell lists with it are not legal to purchase it from
May I say: Ugly. Compounded by limiting scrolls to 6th level or below.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
Is this a case of being purposefully being obtuse (as I have been accused in the past!) or is this a real problem? I haven't seen this locally... and I have been running PFS for almost three years now. Granted, I don't play a caster-type character usually though...
|
|
May I ask how many of the scenarios, which are at highest designed for a low range of 7th level characters, you have found plane shift is necessary in?
I have only played a few, mainly as a fighter-type, so none that I can recall. But, again, I have only played a few.
And having quests at 9+ to other planes? Classic. "Welcome to Sigil."
And Plane Shift was just a quickly found example where the "new rule" screws things up massively. I just remembered the level difference from back when playing LG...
|
|
I really think you guys are over-complicating this, which is creating confusion when people are asking for clarification.
Here's what it is, paraphrasing the Guide, and the clarifications from the Orgs:
When you want to buy a consumable, and the spell is on multiple lists, you pay the price appropriate to the Wizard, Cleric or Druid level of the spell.
If the spell is only on the list of another class (eg Ranger or Paladin) you may buy the consumable at the appropriate price.
If using a Wizard/Cleric/Druid list results in a consumable which conflicts with your Arcane/Divine casting type (ex CLW for a Bard), treat the consumable as if it were your casting type.
(Not mentioned prior to this on this thread) If a spell differs in levels on the Cleric/Druid/Wizard lists, purchase the consumable at the price of the appropriate magic.
Could things be rephrased for clarity to help out folks like the OP? Of course. I reccomended one possibility earlier myself. However, I think some folks are using his questions to go looking for more problems than people are actually experiencing in the campaign. EDIT: Like Arnim, I have been GMing PFS since its inception 3 years ago, and I have never had this rule questioned at one of my tables.
They could spell out every corner case in the Guide, but we don't really need another Core Rulebook. And certain things for Org Play are going to differ from the Core Rules, because a table GM cannot say in Org Play (like they could in a home game) "Sorry, but there is no nation of bard item craftsmen cranking out wands of hideous laughter for you in my campaign world."
|
|
And having quests at 9+ to other planes? Classic. "Welcome to Sigil."
Except that in PFS, the only scenarios at 9+ are the ones for 12th-level characters (ie the retirement arc). The next highest tier is 7-11, so you are not going to see a plot that would exclude a group of 7th level characters.
Could we see planar stuff in the future? Of course, but we can reanimate this horse then.|
|
And having quests at 9+ to other planes? Classic. "Welcome to Sigil."
Except that in PFS, the only scenarios at 9+ are the ones for 12th-level characters (ie the retirement arc). The next highest tier is 7-11, so you are not going to see a plot that would exclude a group of 7th level characters.
Could we see planar stuff in the future? Of course, but we can reanimate this horse then.
Plane Shift was the specific reference for a general case.
Here is a partial (I didn't include any spells with multiple levels where both sides are 7+) list of spells with issues as scrolls from just the core rulebook:
Animate Dead: Cleric 3, Wizard 4
Antimagic Field: Cleric 8, Wizard 6
Banishment: Cleric 6, Wizard 7
Bestow Curse: Cleric 3, Wizard 4
Blindness/Deafness: Cleric 3, Wizard 2
Blight: Druid 4, Wizard 5
Calm Emotions: Bard 2, Cleric 2
Charm Monster, Mass: Bard 6, Wizard 8
Contagion: Cleric 3, Druid 3, Wizard 4
Continual Flame: Cleric 3, Wizard 2
Control Water: Cleric 4, Druid 4, Wizard 6
Darkvision: Ranger 3, Wizard 2
Dismissal: Cleric 4, Wizard 5
Enthrall: Bard 2, Cleric 2
Find the Path: Bard 6, Cleric 6, Druid 6
Fire Trap: Druid 2, Wizard 4
Freedom of Movement: Bard 4, Cleric 4, Druid 4
Gentle Repose: Cleric 2, Wizard 3
Irresistable Dance: Bard 6, Wizard 8
Locate Object: Cleric 3, Wizard 2
Magic Weapon, Greater: Cleric 4, Wizard 3
Nondetection: Ranger 4, Wizard 3
Obscure Object: Cleric 3, Wizard 2
Plane Shift: Cleric 5, Wizard 7
Project Image: Bard 6, Wizard 7
Remove Curse: Cleric 3, Wizard 4
Repulsion: Cleric 7, Wizard 6
Sending: Cleric 4, Wizard 5
Speak with Animals: Bard 3, Druid 1
Speak with Plants: Bard 4, Druid 3
Stone Shape: Cleric 3, Druid 3, Wizard 4
Stoneskin: Druid 5, Wizard 4
Tongues: Cleric 4, Wizard 3
True Seeing: Cleric 5, Wizard 6
Undetectable Alignment: Bard 1, Cleric 2
Wall of Fire: Druid 5, Wizard 4
It is a mix of spells which are semi-legal, where either Divine or Arcane are 6 or less, but the other is 7+; and those where the scroll is only available as Arcane or Divine, per the rules as written, but there are casters who use the other form of magic. It also includes a general list of spells where the "scroll legal" sources are different-but-legal levels.
Also, as a side note, that 7th+ level limitation may be a bit ambiguous. How about scrolls for other casters whose spell lists don't go as far as 9th level spells? Bards only go to 6th level, so, technically, as the rules have been written, any Bard-only spell would be a legal scroll purchase...
Also, as a side note, that 7th+ level limitation may be a bit ambiguous. How about scrolls for other casters whose spell lists don't go as far as 9th level spells? Bards only go to 6th level, so, technically, as the rules have been written, any Bard-only spell would be a legal scroll purchase...
Just a note on this. While it is not spelled out in the Guide, The former head of the PFS, Joshua, explained in the forums that the restriction on 7th level+ spells is meant to tie in to the PCs having a level limit of 12 and thus not having access to 7th level+ spells either, seeing as how a PC would have to be at least 13th level to get a 7th level spell. So this could in turn be translated into meaning that any spells levels a delayed-casting level character would get after 12th level would not be available either. And if that is the way it is meant to be, then bard spell or 5th or 6th level would be off limits since bards do not get 5th level spells til 13th level. However, I do not expect Mark or Hyrum to rule this as the case, as that would make things even more confusing.
|
|
Witness to this that a venture captain was clearly getting it wrong and wasn't sure whether or not certain 'clarifications' as you call them still applied or not.
Constantly posting that someone is "wrong" to support that your opinion is more "right" in a post that clearly has some ambiguity is a bit irritating.
Just because a someone has Venture Captain behind their name does not make them infallible, however, it may mean they are aware of some RAI based on their interactions with other VC's and the leadership of the community.
As I stated prior, and we can agree, the rules as listed in the Guide to do not fully clarify the scroll issue. However, we can help the OP and others with this issue by stating what we have gleaned from impromptu discussions with "people in the know" at conventions.
I do remember Josh hand-waiving the scroll "type" issue and have been unable to find that threat or any that would revoke that stance. Again, if anyone find it, please linkify this thread.
Granted, knowing RAI will not help a rules-lawyer, but to ignore it is ridiculous. My personal opinion on the merits of what the rules are is not relevant, just that I believe my understanding is what the RAI are.
From my previous posting, the error I made was to exclude the druid as a "core" class. It should be included with the Wizard & Cleric for purposes of pricing.
Constantly posting that someone is "wrong" to support that your opinion is more "right" in a post that clearly has some ambiguity is a bit irritating.
My point wasn't to call you out on making a mistake. It was merely to demonstrate that its easy to get this wrong, which you have to admit, right?
I'm not wanting to take you to task on getting something wrong, but I do want to take you to task on claiming:
it is relatively easy to followIt's not easy to follow for me, and it's not for others.
I don't believe that it achieves what you claim it does, rather all I think it was meant to do was to remove level 1 scrolls and wands of lesser restoration. Rather than simply banning them this rule causes a lot of collateral damage, sews confusion, and adds to rules bloat.
Again, I'm sorry if you felt I was harping on you for making an honest mistake. That was not my intent. Rather it was to highlight that it is easy to make those kind of mistakes with these rules, which is why minimizing them should be a priority.
-James
This entire problem stems from a GM (Josh) disliking the core rules (Lesser Restoration is a first level spell for paladin. First level wands cost 750gp), a coming up with a hideously worded house rule (OP Guide) to band-aid over what he didn't like.
Which begs the question. If the Pathfinder Core Rules are unsuitable for Organized Play, why are they suitable for any table play?
I'm not asking this to bash Paizo, or the Core Rules. I'm asking this to determine why PFS Leadership seems so intent in house-ruling so much of the game. Ill-conceived changes to the core rules to deal with perceived imbalances in the game only muddy the rules system. Scroll/Wand costs, Legality of 7+ Level scrolls, Animal Companions, Crafting rules, Spell Duration have all been house ruled, and all require some sort of glossing over of the fact that the house rules themselves are poorly written.
Examples.
Scroll/Wand costs - The rule as written in the OP guide is nothing like the rule as promulgated by the VC's in this thread. There seems to be this gentleman's agreement that everyone is to play the rules as they are handed down through a series of buried posts in threads, and possibly verbal conversations with previous OP Staff. Actually changing the wording to match the intended rule seems to be beyond the bounds of discussion.
Spell Duration - All Spells end at end of scenario. This seems to have been intended to eliminate semi-permanent benefits like Animate Dead and (of all things) Continual Light. But apparently not all spells end at end of scenario, otherwise everyone who had seriously benefited from healing spells would suddenly keel over dead. (Both Cure Light Wounds and Animate Dead have a duration of Instantaneous. Yet only one of the two effects ends at end of scenario.)
So what's the point of this post?
What really needs to be done, is that the OP Guide should encompass all of the house rules, and that the house rules written into the guide should benefit from the same amount of editorial oversight as the actual printed game rules that we're trying to play and enjoy. Poorly written rules are worse than no rules at all, as they simply divide players between those who read the words, and those who attempt to divine intent and extrapolate a working set of unwritten rules.
|
|
In the 3.5 Player's Handbook there were tables with what wands, scrolls and potions where available. In Living Greyhawk only these were available without special access.
In Pathfinder instead of a very limiting table you can get scrolls, wands and potions of almost everything.
Maybe people should focus on what they can get instead of what they can't.
|
|
Actually changing the wording to match the intended rule seems to be beyond the bounds of discussion.
That's not the take-away I got from this at all. What I came away with is that here is something that has (again) fallen through the cracks and needs to have a critical eye (and words) put around it for the 4.0 Guide release.
Is this a case of being purposefully being obtuse (as I have been accused in the past!) or is this a real problem? I haven't seen this locally... and I have been running PFS for almost three years now. Granted, I don't play a caster-type character usually though...
The only time I've seen it being a problem in practice is with bards not being able to use or buy scrolls of CLW (by a literal interpretation of the PFS guidelines, at any rate).
The reason I dislike it is because the rationale behind it always seemed incredibly incoherent.
Argument: "It's a loophole in the Core Rulebook to be able to buy a potion of Lesser Restoration for 50 gp!"
Response: "Then shouldn't the fix be in the Core Rulebook instead of the PFS guidelines?"
Counter-Argument: "Actually, it's not a loophole. The problem is that, in a home campaign, the GM can make it difficult to find potions of paladin spells, but you can't in PFS!"
Response: "Then shouldn't it be equally difficult to find potions of other paladin spells in PFS?"
Counter-Counter-Argument: "We've argued about this so many times, let's never discuss it again!"
Response: "......"
|
How does the rules for scrolls and such not make sense? It's Organized Play, and being as such, you need different rules to make sure that character wealth levels stay relatively the same. Adding all the creation abilities would definitely skew this and just add a bunch of brokenness to this particular setting. I mean, it's great for home games but not for PFS.
Besides, how are GMs supposed to track all that you make? From the book it states:
The creator needs a fairly quiet, comfortable, and well-lit place in which to work. Any place suitable for preparing spells is suitable for making items. Creating an item requires 8 hours of work per 1,000 gp in the item's base price (or fraction thereof), with a minimum of at least 8 hours...
The caster can work for up to 8 hours each day. He cannot rush the process by working longer each day, but the days need not be consecutive, and the caster can use the rest of his time as he sees fit. If the caster is out adventuring, he can devote 4 hours each day to item creation, although he nets only 2 hours'worth of work.
How the crap do you regulate how much time a PC spends on item creation? How much downtime is between scenarios you play? Who is keeping track of whether or not you made the appropriate CL checks? This is a headache for any organized play environment, and can quickly get out of hand.
The system needs to have parity, and right now the organized play rules achieve that to a good degree. Sure, maybe wording could be different, but let's face it - regardless of how it's written, we will have tons of rules lawyers getting their panties in a twist because you *could* interpret this in such a way which allows you to access some broken mechanic.
/On a side note in a home game, I would say you can never buy 1st level paladin spells cheaper than you would to have to buy from a cleric. For instance, lesser restoration is something a cleric can cast upon reaching 3rd level (assuming straight cleric). The paladin can cast it at 4th. I would say the services of a 3rd level cleric is definitely cheaper than that of a 4th level paladin. I mean, you're asking a paladin to waste his time writing you a scroll when he's more adept at charging into battle with some lesser demon.
It's Organized Play, and being as such, you need different rules to make sure that character wealth levels stay relatively the same. [..] The system needs to have parity, and right now the organized play rules achieve that to a good degree.
The same between what and what? Parity between what and what?
It boggles my mind that there are people who were outraged that a PC used to be able to buy a 50 gp potion of Lesser Restoration from a paladin (instead of an equally good 300 gp potion of Lesser Restoration from a cleric), but who are indifferent that a PC can buy a 50 gp oil of Bless Weapon from a paladin (instead of an inferior 300 gp oil of Align Weapon [Good] from a cleric).
Bonus question:
According to the rules, how much does a scroll of Honeyed Tongue cost?
|
|
It's Organized Play, and being as such, you need different rules to make sure that character wealth levels stay relatively the same. [..] The system needs to have parity, and right now the organized play rules achieve that to a good degree.The same between what and what? Parity between what and what?
It boggles my mind that there are people who were outraged that a PC used to be able to buy a 50 gp potion of Lesser Restoration from a paladin (instead of an equally good 300 gp potion of Lesser Restoration from a cleric), but who are indifferent that a PC can buy a 50 gp oil of Bless Weapon from a paladin (instead of an inferior 300 gp oil of Align Weapon [Good] from a cleric).
Character wealth parity.
I'm not outraged. I am in full support of rigid price controls for buying items (unless you can get things on the cheap from your chronicle sheets). So you can't buy magical items for a paladin? Shame. What I take away from this is that the Core rules need to fix their pricing scheme for situations like this, not PFS.
I think cost based on what character level casts the spell at versus caster level might be a way to solve it (and only looking at straight 1-class characters, no multiclass folks). Refer to my /comment in the previous post for an example.
Character wealth parity.
Parity between which two characters? Between two PFS characters (who can buy exactly the same items at exactly the same cost)? Or between a PFS character and a home game character? Or something else?
What I take away from this is that the Core rules need to fix their pricing scheme for situations like this, not PFS.
I'd be fine with that. I just don't believe that rules errata has any place in the PFS guide.
|
|
To be honest, the initial discussion which prompted Josh to make this rule was about Lesser Restoration, and people gaming the system to be able to buy a wand of LR for 750 GP.
Point of clarification: it's not "gaming the system" to purchase a wand of LR for 750 gp. It's the rule! It's no more "gaming the system" than purchasing a tanglefoot bag for 50 gp.
To be honest, the initial discussion which prompted Josh to make this rule was about Lesser Restoration, and people gaming the system to be able to buy a wand of LR for 750 GP.Point of clarification: it's not "gaming the system" to purchase a wand of LR for 750 gp. It's the rule! It's no more "gaming the system" than purchasing a tanglefoot bag for 50 gp.
It would still be "gaming the system" according to Argument B ("it this were a home game, you wouldn't be able to find a paladin crafting wands").
Parity between which two characters? Between two PFS characters (who can buy exactly the same items at exactly the same cost)? Or between a PFS character and a home game character? Or something else?Between two PFS characters, since these rules pertain to the organized play.
So how is there a lack of parity between character A and character B when they can both purchase a 50 gp potion of Lesser Restoration?