I understand the concern about the impact to the economy of casting unlimited orisons.
What would be the impact to the economy of a 14th level druid casting "control weather" once per day? Anyone want to calculate the volume of water that your typical thunderstorm creates in a 20 square mile circle?
OK, I will. Let's say it's a fairly minor thunderstorm and only drops one inch of rain in the affected area per hour. That's "only" 17,378,743 gallons, which is "only" as much as 30 20th level clerics casting "create water" nonstop for 24 hours a day.
Since a thunderstorm can be maintained by a druid for 4d12 hours, that fairly average storm will last an average of slightly more than 24 hours if the druid wants it to. Or all day. So that means one 14th level druid casting "control weather" can create more water than 720 clerics casting create water nonstop.
And that water doesn't go away after 24 hours.
Edit: My bad, I forgot druids double the duration of the spell. So double all that water. Oh, and make it rain harder, so double it again... Oh, and maximize it.. well, I think you get my drift...
How many 14th level Druids are in your campaign, BB? Compared to people capable of casting 0-level spells?
Let's just say it's not quite a 3,000 to one ratio, which is how the water creation ability stacks up.
And since a typical 14th level druid can cast that spell at least twice per day...
Remember the druid only has to spend the time casting the spell. Then he/she can go shopping, take a nap, go commit other economy destroying mischief (enhance crops anyone?)...
And this is just one spell caster "abusing" one spell.
I suppose we could talk about the economic impact of a second level spell then, something like, oh, continual flame? Ready to see the lamp-maker's children starve? Explosive runes plus clairvoyance = instant demolition squad. Stone shape = starving sculptors...
The game assumes spell casters are rare. The economic impact of KNOWN magic is beyond calculation, and that's not even looking at the obvious magical spells that mages would research to use to create their own businesses. What level would "chop down tree" be? With that spell and shape wood a druid becomes an instant lumber mill. Take a level of wizard to get Tensor's floating disk and mage hand, and you can chop, mill and ship wood essentially as fast as want to. Heck, you can even sculpt it and put the woodcarvers out of business too. "Ye Olde Druid Furniture shop!"
If you start looking at the economic impact of magic, you might as well throw out the whole economic portion of the game. It falls apart immediately. If you want to look at the ecological impact of magic, there are far more impactful spells than the zero level spells, and they don't even have to be abused, as I've shown. Heck in one month a druid could create a lake the size of a small city in the middle of the desert and maintain it with a few storms a month.
And, of course, if the magic were real, that's exactly the sort of thing people would do. Why take the personal risk, discomfort and time impact of hunting down a dragon hoard when you can become the wealthiest person in a hundred miles on the basis of two or three spells while you sit at home and enjoy all the benefits of luxury with none of the suffering?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the argument is more, 'If you choose to ignore the prices charged for spellcasting as set down in the Core book, then you can break the ecomonics of your game world.' So, you know, don't ignore that. Or be prepared to change other stuff about if you do. But houseruling stuff into being broken doesn't make the game itself broken.
My problem with the 'lots but still limited' concept for cantrips and orisons is that if they're limited at all then, from a purely gamist point of view, you become an idiot for using them for fluff or sub-optimal purposes. I like my spellcasters to be able to cast spells for purely fluff reasons - it makes them feel more like spellcasters. It's seriously improbable that they can break the game that way, despite some of the suggestions in this thread. On the other hand, limited cantrips and orisons, but replacing them with unlimited 'powers' would also work for me (although it'd be a lot more powerful and prone to abuse) from the point of view of being able to do cool magic stuff as fluff.
So your argument is "High level spells are broken so letting low level spells be broken makes no difference"?
Actually... Yeah, I'd kind of agree with that.
I think worrying and fretting about the local economy of a world that does in fact have ANY MAGIC... is going to just be frusrtrating.
As much as it doesn't help the debate much, it IS still a GAME... and considering how many world and economy changing spells are out at levels 1-9... worrying about the 0 level spells aren't really that important.
My philosophy is that in a game like this... if ever forced to choose between 'player has a chance to abuse power...' and 'Player casts his spells and is useless the rest of the day...'
I'm going to go with whatever keeps the players IN the game ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So your argument is "High level spells are broken so letting low level spells be broken makes no difference"?
TOZ, I know that you just like to needle people, but since you asked...
No, my argument is "magic breaks any known economic model that human beings have ever envisioned, so why worry about how one or a few particular magic spells break one or a few economic aspects?"
Once you introduce magic, the whole universe changes. It's not remotely possible to understand what impact that would have on an economy, an environment or a culture. It's all pure fantasy.
I think it's perfectly reasonable and worthwhile to discuss how unlimited zero level spells might unbalance certain aspects of the game, and a lot of posts on this thread do that. But the posts that talk about how it would have this or that impact on desert cultures, chaining priests to provide irrigation, etc. are just pointless since the entire existence of magic has already put all of that on the table. Unlimited zero level spells are a tiny, tiny fraction of the unpredictable effects of magic on culture, economy and the environment. So I'm just not sure why people who have no problem with druids capable of repeatedly casting four day 20 mile radius thunderstorms are worried about how much water a bunch of chained up first level clerics could be forced to cast. That's all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, I think what people here are failing to see is the impact on day-to-day life.
The actual problem is that you don't understand the real impact.
Making swimming pools is one kind of stupidity but even a 1st level caster can create 1,200 gallons in an hour - that is enough for daily water needs for 400 people in an arid environment.
All of whom then die of starvation while well-hydrated, because they don't have any crops to eat, because they don't have enough water to grow anything. All create water can do in an arid area is allow travelers to get through without hauling (as much) in the way of water barrels.
Normal water reqs in a standard environment being a gallon a day, he could provide enough drinking water for 1,200 people at 1st level with 10 minutes of minutes of work.
Which is changing nothing about the world. If they've got enough water to grow crops, they've already got enough water to drink. People don't dehydrate to death in droughts; they starve as a result of crop failure because there isn't enough water to grow food. At best, you're keeping people from dying from cholera because you have clean drinking water.
Similarly, purify food and drink only reduces wastage (and even then whatever rats eat stays eaten) and disease, while mending only repairs that which has already been made. These will make society somewhat more prosperous and healthier, but won't transform anything unrecognizably. They just don't have the massive social impact you're imputing.
Well, thanks for answering. I'm sorry my questions irritate you.TOZ, I know that you just like to needle people, but since you asked...
I wouldn't put it to the level of "irritated." It's probably more accurate to say "bemused." Here's why:
I say something like: "If you start looking at the economic impact of magic, you might as well throw out the whole economic portion of the game. It falls apart immediately. If you want to look at the ecological impact of magic, there are far more impactful spells than the zero level spells, and they don't even have to be abused, as I've shown. Heck in one month a druid could create a lake the size of a small city in the middle of the desert and maintain it with a few storms a month."
I find myself bemused because I thought that was pretty clearly pointing out that magic itself is what destroys economic, environmental and cultural verisimilitude if you examine it from any logical or realistic viewpoint. The part where I say "the economic impact of magic" was saying exactly what I meant to say.
And then you come back with: "So your argument is 'High level spells are broken so letting low level spells be broken makes no difference'?"
And I read that and think "WTF?" Where did ToZ get that idea? Didn't I clearly just say that MAGIC causes problems with modeling economies, cultures and environments? Where did I say "high level spells are broken?" Where did I say it was OK if they were? What did ToZ even read to be interpreting my statements that way? And what answer is he looking for? Does he expect me to say "yes" so he can say "Aha! So you think broken high level spells are OK, so low levels can be too, but of course there are hundreds or thousands of low level casters for every high level caster so therefore your argument is invalid because it is more important to have low level spells balanced due to the vast numbers of low level casters!"
So I shake my head and say "no ToZ, that's not what I said, it's not close to what I said, and I am pretty sure, based on your history on these boards, that I understand exactly why you are trying to characterize my argument in a way that sets up your rebuttal."
Magic breaks economic, environmental and cultural models. Period. Arguing about how one spell or another is going to be abused to destroy an economy, environment or culture is pointless since the simple existence of magic itself has already done that.
So the only thing to worry about is whether the spells are "broken" from a game balance perspective. If they are, then fix them. If they are not, then stop arguing how they would drastically change economies, cultures or environments. That's simply a pointless distraction since "animate dead" has already done that a thousand times over.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Similarly, purify food and drink only reduces wastage (and even then whatever rats eat stays eaten) and disease,
Purify water would be a huge boon to sea travel. No more having to carry a dozen barrels of freshwater, and stop in at every island, hoping to find freshwater to refill them, so long as there is a person on the ship capable of casting the spell. Just haul in seawater, purify it, and you're good to go.
.
But, really, I think the number one thing to think about magic affecting society is that the game world has been designed with certain setting assumptions in place, *regardless of the existance of these spells.*
So if Osirion, Katapesh, Nex, Qadira, Thuvia and / or Rahadoum are arid deserts, they are arid deserts *despite* the existence of create water and / or decanters of endless water. Whatever natural water sources they have would be similarly reduced (except in the case of Rahadoum, which has less of this sort of magic available).
Using this as a guideline, sea travel in Golarion is as predominate as it is *because* of the use of these spells. Tales about the Linnorm King (queen, whatever) who raided Chelish ports and put in at Absalom to spend her booty, didn't bother mentioning that the godi and skald on her ship used magic to make their foodstuffs last longer, and save them from having to put in every couple of days to refresh their water supply, because that's the sort of thing that doesn't get into an epic tale. It's just matter-of-fact, in a setting where that is taken for granted. It doesn't change the world, the world was built as it was, and those effects are part of the pre-existing setting, so, instead of create water / purify water 'changing' Osirion, create water / purify water are part of the reason why Osirion exists as it does.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A "decanter of endless water" will shoot 30 gallons of water a round. That's 300 gallons a minute or 432,000 gallons a day. And it is "endless" requiring no chained clerics or nonstop casting. It costs 9,000g to buy, so it can be made for what, half of that? So any ninth level cleric with "Craft Wondrous Item" feat and a king willing to fork over the gold can create one of those A DAY.So after a month of hard work and a king willing to dedicate 120,000g or so, you've got an ENDLESS SUPPLY of 12,960,000 gallons of water per day.
Now that king can employ his clerics to raise his army of undead and flood the lands of his enemy with endless thunderstorms until there is nothing left.
Magic. Breaks. The. World. period.
How many 14th level Druids are in your campaign, BB? Compared to people capable of casting 0-level spells?
More importantly, how many 14th level Druids are going to say "f*** nature, I think we need tons of rain"? Not that many I suspect. That's the type of spell that's used to correct an imbalance, not create one. Imo, of course.
Create Water
School conjuration (creation) [water]; Level cleric 0, druid 0, paladin 1
casting Time 1 standard action
components V, S
range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect up to 2 gallons of water/level
duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell resistance no
This spell generates wholesome, drinkable water, just like clean
rain water. Water can be created in an area as small as will actually
contain the liquid, or in an area three times as large—possibly
creating a downpour or filling many small receptacles. This water
disappears after 1 day if not consumed.
Note: Conjuration spells can’t create substances or objects
within a creature. Water weighs about 8 pounds per gallon. One
cubic foot of water contains roughly 8 gallons and weighs about
60 pounds.
Now seriously. Create water isn't that big of a deal. Get over it.
How many 14th level Druids are in your campaign, BB? Compared to people capable of casting 0-level spells?More importantly, how many 14th level Druids are going to say "f*** nature, I think we need tons of rain"? Not that many I suspect. That's the type of spell that's used to correct an imbalance, not create one. Imo, of course.
The spell can be cast by clerics. Druids just cast it better.
The spell can be cast by clerics. Druids just cast it better.How many 14th level Druids are in your campaign, BB? Compared to people capable of casting 0-level spells?More importantly, how many 14th level Druids are going to say "f*** nature, I think we need tons of rain"? Not that many I suspect. That's the type of spell that's used to correct an imbalance, not create one. Imo, of course.
And any Cleric capable of casting it is under the scrutiny of a god. And their actions will draw the attention of other gods / Clerics / Druids if they use it to make sweeping changes.
And any Cleric capable of casting it is under the scrutiny of a god. And their actions will draw the attention of other gods / Clerics / Druids if they use it to make sweeping changes.The spell can be cast by clerics. Druids just cast it better.How many 14th level Druids are in your campaign, BB? Compared to people capable of casting 0-level spells?More importantly, how many 14th level Druids are going to say "f*** nature, I think we need tons of rain"? Not that many I suspect. That's the type of spell that's used to correct an imbalance, not create one. Imo, of course.
The same gods that would be watching them use orisons I suppose.
And there are no evil gods, and no atheistic clerics in the game either.
Sure that solves everything.
|
|
There's actually a scenario idea in one of the Katapesh books (probably Dark Markets IIRC) where some group get hold of a decanter of endless water, bury it in the desert, and hey presto - instant oasis! Of course, then along come the locals who actually happened to need that bit of desert to, you know, still be desert, and are not happy about it...
... So yeah, people do this sort of stuff in Golarion and, guess what - it doesn't break the world, it just provides some interesting adventure hooks... ;)
And any Cleric capable of casting it is under the scrutiny of a god. And their actions will draw the attention of other gods / Clerics / Druids if they use it to make sweeping changes.The spell can be cast by clerics. Druids just cast it better.How many 14th level Druids are in your campaign, BB? Compared to people capable of casting 0-level spells?More importantly, how many 14th level Druids are going to say "f*** nature, I think we need tons of rain"? Not that many I suspect. That's the type of spell that's used to correct an imbalance, not create one. Imo, of course.The same gods that would be watching them use orisons I suppose.
And there are no evil gods, and no atheistic clerics in the game either.
Sure that solves everything.
Small stuff gets less attention. Back in the day a 0 level spell wasn't even granted by the deity, just a flunky. Big stuff draws attention. I'd say that's fairly reasonable. If an evil god makes a move he will be countered by a good god.
Small stuff gets less attention. Back in the day a 0 level spell wasn't even granted by the deity, just a flunky. Big stuff draws attention. I'd say that's fairly reasonable. If an evil god makes a move he will be countered by a good god.
Ignoring my rebuttals does not refute them or make them go away.
Some gods are evil and would have no problem destroying an entire planet. In fact there are plenty of campaigns based on exactly that. Gods go insane all the time in the RPG genre. Oracles are essentially atheistic clerics, they cast cleric spells without having them granted by a deity.
What one culture or race deems "balanced" might be completely "unbalanced" to another. An amphibious druid might very well decide to turn the desert into a swamp in the name of balance.
If you think your comments here have remotely invalidated the concept of magic breaking the world, you are seriously fooling yourself.
There's actually a scenario idea in one of the Katapesh books (probably Dark Markets IIRC) where some group get hold of a decanter of endless water, bury it in the desert, and hey presto - instant oasis! Of course, then along come the locals who actually happened to need that bit of desert to, you know, still be desert, and are not happy about it...
... So yeah, people do this sort of stuff in Golarion and, guess what - it doesn't break the world, it just provides some interesting adventure hooks... ;)
No, "people" do not do "this sort of stuff in Golarion" in any way, shape or form. Campaign designers introduce the concept as a plot hook to create a story around it. That story assumes the scenario is rare. If Golarion were a "real place" populated by "real people" that wouldn't be happening as a "clever plot point." It would be happening all the time, and would not be one decanter creating one oasis. It would be an entire nation abusing magic to destroy a neighbor. Or do you think that the world was never truly threatened with nuclear war?
The idea that for every possible abuse of magic some knight on a white horse is going to come in and stop the miscreants is simply not a credible argument against the abuse that people would find for magic.
Ignoring my rebuttals does not refute them or make them go away.Some gods are evil and would have no problem destroying an entire planet. In fact there are plenty of campaigns based on exactly that. Gods go insane all the time in the RPG genre. Oracles are essentially atheistic clerics, they cast cleric spells without having them granted by a deity.
What one culture or race deems "balanced" might be completely "unbalanced" to another. An amphibious druid might very well decide to turn the desert into a swamp in the name of balance.
If you think your comments here have remotely invalidated the concept of magic breaking the game, you are seriously fooling yourself.
I'm not the one ignoring a rebuttal. That would be you. If a game world has existed in a given state for a period of time, do you seriosly expect to be able to make major ecological changes without drawing attention? I think the idea that big changes will draw attention makes perfect sense. But tht's just me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not the one ignoring a rebuttal. That would be you. If a game world has existed in a given state for a period of time, do you seriosly expect to be able to make major ecological changes without drawing attention? I think the idea that big changes will draw attention makes perfect sense. But tht's just me.
Ignoring my rebuttals does not refute them or make them go away.Some gods are evil and would have no problem destroying an entire planet. In fact there are plenty of campaigns based on exactly that. Gods go insane all the time in the RPG genre. Oracles are essentially atheistic clerics, they cast cleric spells without having them granted by a deity.
What one culture or race deems "balanced" might be completely "unbalanced" to another. An amphibious druid might very well decide to turn the desert into a swamp in the name of balance.
If you think your comments here have remotely invalidated the concept of magic breaking the game, you are seriously fooling yourself.
Rebuttal: To say that "if a game world existed in a given state for a period of time" as the basis for any argument is completely and literally nonsensical. The game world DOESN'T EXIST. Golarion IS NOT REAL. It's a fantasy created by game designers for the purpose of playing a game. It is in effect nothing but a virtual game board. To say that the fact that Golarion exists proves that people would not abuse magic and break the world is completely and utterly a baseless argument in every conceivable way.
How's that for a rebuttal Chance?
There's actually a scenario idea in one of the Katapesh books (probably Dark Markets IIRC) where some group get hold of a decanter of endless water, bury it in the desert, and hey presto - instant oasis! Of course, then along come the locals who actually happened to need that bit of desert to, you know, still be desert, and are not happy about it...
... So yeah, people do this sort of stuff in Golarion and, guess what - it doesn't break the world, it just provides some interesting adventure hooks... ;)
I don't mean this arguementatively. I simply dont understand.
Why would anyone "need" a desert, Global climate issues aside of course?
Also depending on how deep the water table is underneath expidous excavation. Also take into acount unskilled labor is cheap like one silver piece a day. Could a cleric do more useful things in his day than create water to earn money if someone could hire some commoners to dig a well. Also mending does not fix heavy tihngs read the description and takes ten minutes to cast.
Also depending on how deep the water table is underneath expidous excavation. Also take into acount unskilled labor is cheap like one silver piece a day. Could a cleric do more useful things in his day than create water to earn money if someone could hire some commoners to dig a well. Also mending does not fix heavy tihngs read the description and takes ten minutes to cast.
Never noticed the casting time of mending before.
Also depending on how deep the water table is underneath expidous excavation. Also take into acount unskilled labor is cheap like one silver piece a day. Could a cleric do more useful things in his day than create water to earn money if someone could hire some commoners to dig a well. Also mending does not fix heavy tihngs read the description and takes ten minutes to cast.Never noticed the casting time of mending before.
Yeah I only noticed it a few months ago and was suprised by it.
Yeah I only noticed it a few months ago and was suprised by it.Also depending on how deep the water table is underneath expidous excavation. Also take into acount unskilled labor is cheap like one silver piece a day. Could a cleric do more useful things in his day than create water to earn money if someone could hire some commoners to dig a well. Also mending does not fix heavy tihngs read the description and takes ten minutes to cast.Never noticed the casting time of mending before.
Not a huge deal. It's always been an out of combat spell anyway, but makes it less useful to "open a tailor shop" or some such nonsense.
|
|
Why would anyone "need" a desert, Global climate issues aside of course?
It's in 'Dark Markets: a guide to Katapesh', page 51 under 'Squatter's Rights'. It's all to do with nagri salt used in pesh production and... well, it's about a bunch of stuff covered in the book... But the point is that when this stuff happens, it's a plot hook, not the end of the gaming world. Like an evil Cleric trying to turn a forest into a swamp... when it crops up do you whine about the fact that 'magic has broken the verisimilitude of the game world! OMG!', or do you gather your buddies, ride on out there, and have an adventure?
No, "people" do not do "this sort of stuff in Golarion" in any way, shape or form...
... Except when they, you know, do... as written in the books... by the guys who invented the game world... ;p
There's actually a scenario idea in one of the Katapesh books (probably Dark Markets IIRC) where some group get hold of a decanter of endless water, bury it in the desert, and hey presto - instant oasis! Of course, then along come the locals who actually happened to need that bit of desert to, you know, still be desert, and are not happy about it...
... So yeah, people do this sort of stuff in Golarion and, guess what - it doesn't break the world, it just provides some interesting adventure hooks... ;)
I don't mean this arguementatively. I simply dont understand.
Why would anyone "need" a desert, Global climate issues aside of course?
Well, suppose you're a nomadic herder, like the Bedouins. Where you once had an open travel route, there is now a settlement...who demand a toll.
Not a huge deal. It's always been an out of combat spell anyway, but makes it less useful to "open a tailor shop" or some such nonsense.Yeah I only noticed it a few months ago and was suprised by it.Also depending on how deep the water table is underneath expidous excavation. Also take into acount unskilled labor is cheap like one silver piece a day. Could a cleric do more useful things in his day than create water to earn money if someone could hire some commoners to dig a well. Also mending does not fix heavy tihngs read the description and takes ten minutes to cast.Never noticed the casting time of mending before.
Well, ten minutes is not much time to fix an expensive suit of clothes or repair an expensive set of boots. A mage could repair six items per hour or 48 items in a typical 8 hour work day. We'll say 40 items with some breaks to rest those aching fingers. 200 items perfectly repaired per week. Of course since the mage's fixes don't require expensive materials, tools or skills, he/she would really only accept the very best items to fix. You know the items that make a tailor or cobbler's job profitable. So tailors and cobblers in the area are going to have to take nothing but the mage's castoff work while the mage is making ten gold a pop for fixing those fancy displacer beast hide boots and dragon hide armor items for the nobility. Figure 4,000g per week as long as there is demand, without even considering the special cases where the queen's jewel-encrusted chastity belt was jimmied open by the visiting Duke and needs to be repaired NOW and money is no object.
So, yeah, economic impact even at 10 minutes.
No, "people" do not do "this sort of stuff in Golarion" in any way, shape or form...... Except when they, you know, do... as written in the books... by the guys who invented the game world... ;p
... so I see you have a problem differentiating between the plot-driven fictional actions of fictional people and the historical evidence of what actual people with actual power actually do.
The whole argument of this thread is "if zero level spells are unlimited, people would abuse them in various ways."
Your response is "Well, since the game and module writers don't write people as acting like actual self-interested people pursuing their own desires and instead write people as following their pre-determined plot points, then zero level spells can't be abused, and neither can any other form of magic. Or non-magic for that matter. In fact NOTHING can be abused because it's all going according to plan."
Sort of an RPG version of a deterministic philosophy I guess. Nobody has free will, so by definition nobody can abuse anything.
OK. You win.
|
|
... so I see you have a problem differentiating between the plot-driven fictional actions of fictional people and the historical evidence of what actual people with actual power actually do.
No problem at all: one's a game of action and fantasy I play in, the other's a history lesson (of dubious accuracy).
Your response is...
No. My response is what I wrote. Please try to respect that.
OK. You win.
Cheers. It takes a big man to admit that. :)
... so I see you have a problem differentiating between the plot-driven fictional actions of fictional people and the historical evidence of what actual people with actual power actually do.No problem at all: one's a game of action and fantasy I play in, the other's a history lesson (of dubious accuracy).
Your response is...No. My response is what I wrote. Please try to respect that.
OK. You win.Cheers. It takes a big man to admit that. :)
I believe my representation of your argument is perfectly accurate. Please try to respect that.
If you disagree, show me where it's wrong.
Not a huge deal. It's always been an out of combat spell anyway, but makes it less useful to "open a tailor shop" or some such nonsense.Yeah I only noticed it a few months ago and was suprised by it.Also depending on how deep the water table is underneath expidous excavation. Also take into acount unskilled labor is cheap like one silver piece a day. Could a cleric do more useful things in his day than create water to earn money if someone could hire some commoners to dig a well. Also mending does not fix heavy tihngs read the description and takes ten minutes to cast.Never noticed the casting time of mending before.Well, ten minutes is not much time to fix an expensive suit of clothes or repair an expensive set of boots. A mage could repair six items per hour or 48 items in a typical 8 hour work day. We'll say 40 items with some breaks to rest those aching fingers. 200 items perfectly repaired per week. Of course since the mage's fixes don't require expensive materials, tools or skills, he/she would really only accept the very best items to fix. You know the items that make a tailor or cobbler's job profitable. So tailors and cobblers in the area are going to have to take nothing but the mage's castoff work while the mage is making ten gold a pop for fixing those fancy displacer beast hide boots and dragon hide armor items for the nobility. Figure 4,000g per week as long as there is demand, without even considering the special cases where the queen's jewel-encrusted chastity belt was jimmied open by the visiting Duke and needs to be repaired NOW and money is no object.
So, yeah, economic impact even at 10 minutes.
The one thing is how repetitiveness the work for the wizard this work will be casting the same spell over and over. Would the wizard rather be spending his time studying magic than fixing things and more time having fun than getting insanely wealthy.
I'm not the one ignoring a rebuttal. That would be you. If a game world has existed in a given state for a period of time, do you seriosly expect to be able to make major ecological changes without drawing attention? I think the idea that big changes will draw attention makes perfect sense. But tht's just me.
Ignoring my rebuttals does not refute them or make them go away.Some gods are evil and would have no problem destroying an entire planet. In fact there are plenty of campaigns based on exactly that. Gods go insane all the time in the RPG genre. Oracles are essentially atheistic clerics, they cast cleric spells without having them granted by a deity.
What one culture or race deems "balanced" might be completely "unbalanced" to another. An amphibious druid might very well decide to turn the desert into a swamp in the name of balance.
If you think your comments here have remotely invalidated the concept of magic breaking the game, you are seriously fooling yourself.
Rebuttal: To say that "if a game world existed in a given state for a period of time" as the basis for any argument is completely and literally nonsensical. The game world DOESN'T EXIST. Golarion IS NOT REAL. It's a fantasy created by game designers for the purpose of playing a game. It is in effect nothing but a virtual game board. To say that the fact that Golarion exists proves that people would not abuse magic and break the world is completely and utterly a baseless argument in every conceivable way.
How's that for a rebuttal Chance?
Not very good. The game world exists as a simulation / setting for a game with postulated rules governing it's existence. Yes, it's fictional / fantasy (is there anyone who doesn't understand that?), but it is presented as a setting in which given conditions exist, and have existed for a period of time, with a given outcome. I don't even use Golarion myself :) The "it's fantasy so it doesn't have to be rational" argument can be trotted out for everything. In which case, there isn't any base for a discussion about anything in the game world, is there? That pretty much kills most of the threads on this board then. Congratulations.
|
|
I believe my representation of your argument is perfectly accurate. Please try to respect that.
Wait... so I say 'X', you say that I'm saying 'Y', I point out that I'm not, in fact, saying 'Y', but that I did say 'X' and... you tell me I'm wrong... or lying..?
You see, pulling stuff like that doesn't seem the way to get respect to me... but ho hum, maybe it's a cultural thing?
The thread's still here, feel free to go back and read what I've posted. Please don't feel free to put false words in my mouth. Sure, I can't stop you, but I'd have hoped that common courtesy would have.
I believe my representation of your argument is perfectly accurate. Please try to respect that.Wait... so I say 'X', you say that I'm saying 'Y', I point out that I'm not, in fact, saying 'Y', but that I did say 'X' and... you tell me I'm wrong... or lying..?
You see, pulling stuff like that doesn't seem the way to get respect to me... but ho hum, maybe it's a cultural thing?
The thread's still here, feel free to go back and read what I've posted. Please don't feel free to put false words in my mouth. Sure, I can't stop you, but I'd have hoped that common courtesy would have.
Part of time-honored debate tactics is to take someones argument, put it into different words and present it back to them for them to see how what they are saying is being perceived.
Again, you have not disputed any part of my rewording of your words. You said: "Except when they, you know, do... as written in the books... by the guys who invented the game world"
I said: "Well, since the game and module writers don't write people as acting like actual self-interested people pursuing their own desires and instead write people as following their pre-determined plot points..." This is a restatement of "except when they, you know, do... as written in the books..."
What is wrong in how I restated your words? Are you saying that I've misstated your point here? I think it's an absolutely valid way to restate your point. The fact that it doesn't do much to make your argument look very good is PRECISELY the point of it.
I said: "then zero level spells can't be abused, and neither can any other form of magic. Or non-magic for that matter. In fact NOTHING can be abused because it's all going according to plan." Since this is the point of the thread I am assuming that you are arguing that zero level spells aren't capable of being abused in Golarian, and that is the case because it is written in the books "by the guys who invented the game world". Again, I think this is an absolutely solid way to restate your point. Are you saying that you are NOT arguing that in Golarion these spells do not get abused because the writers wrote it that way? If not, then what the heck ARE you saying?
And finally, I make the logical extension that since you believe that people won't abuse magic because the game writers write it that way, that you are indicating that there is no free will in Golarion. Because if there was free will in Golarion "people" would be able to act in ways contrary to what the writers intended.
Again, what did I mischaracterize? What did I misstate?
Yes, my rewording makes your argument look pretty silly. That's the point.
Not very good. The game world exists as a simulation / setting for a game with postulated rules governing it's existence. Yes, it's fictional / fantasy (is there anyone who doesn't understand that?), but it is presented as a setting in which given conditions exist, and have existed for a period of time, with a given outcome. I don't even use Golarion myself :) The "it's fantasy so it doesn't have to be...
So, do you understand that this argument is not constrained to Golarion? And that the argument that actual people would abuse these spells can't be rebutted with "Well, they don't in Golarion"?
It doesn't MATTER what they do in Golarion. Those are fictional people following the puppet plot lines of their writers. Other GMs running campaigns might choose to have people act more REALISTICALLY, and in those cases, magic can be abused. The argument that "Golarion is still standing" doesn't mean ANYTHING in the argument. It's a house of cards. It's standing purely by Deux Ex Machina. The people of Golarion don't abuse magic BECAUSE their WRITERS don't have them do it. That's all it means.
The one thing is how repetitiveness the work for the wizard this work will be casting the same spell over and over. Would the wizard rather be spending his time studying magic than fixing things and more time...
So, I'm a first level mage. I'm broke. I spent all my gold on clothes, supplies and a few minor magic items. I need gold. I need it fast.
So, how can I make a lot of gold pretty quickly? Hmmmm.... let's look at this mending spell... Wow, that's pretty cool!
So I set up a shop for a couple months, make a couple hundred thou gold... Then I go out and buy all the magic stuff I want. Maybe I still want to go adventuring. Maybe I want to see what else I can do to make money by sitting on my ass all day.
Either way, there's always another first level mage coming out of mage school looking for a way to make a cool hundred thou...
"Hey Kid! Have I got a deal for you!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
0-level spells actually aren't called spells. They're called cantrips or orisons and listed separately from the "spells" section under each class.
Also, there are no rules limiting physical exertion in Pathfinder. They're just left to common sense/DM adjudication. The only reference to having to rest has to do with spell preparation, and the only specified ways to become fatigued are via magic abilities or a forced march, IIRC.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Part of time-honored debate tactics is to take someones argument, put it into different words and present it back to them for them to see how what they are saying is being perceived.
Actually, that's the pretty much the definition of a Straw Man Fallacy.
Part of the time-honored traditions of debate is to ask "did you mean" and then take someones argument, put it into different words and present it back to them. In order to gain better clarity.
Dismantling and reassembling someone's argument and then forcing them to defend your reconstructed argument is not a debate tactic. It's a disingenuous tactic.
I said: "Well, since the game and module writers don't write people as acting like actual self-interested people pursuing their own desires and instead write people as following their pre-determined plot points..." This is a restatement of "except when they, you know, do... as written in the books..."
No, brass, it's not. Not even a little bit.
What is wrong in how I restated your words?
You have inserted several assumptions into the argument that are nigh indefensible, in order to force the good Professor into defending things he never said.
Are you saying that I've misstated your point here? I think it's an absolutely valid way to restate your point. The fact that it doesn't do much to make your argument look very good is PRECISELY the point of it.
::facepalm::
Can I use this "debate tactic?" Let me try it out: So what brass is arguing here is that an effective means of "winning" a debate is to twist and manipulate other people's statements, load them up with indefensible assumptions, and then berate them for failing to defend things they never said. Since this is all extremely disingenuous and pretty brazenly underhanded, what brass is essentially saying is the best way to win a "debate" on the internet is to treat other people without respect and rely on completely dishonest arguments. After all, it's the internet, it's not like anyone can punch you for being such a dick.
Wow, brass, you're right. That is an effective "debate tactic." Your position looks completely ridiculous now.