A difference of 10K in WBL is about a +1 in both attack and AC.
Yes, but you're talking about small differences. I've never been talking about small differences. I'm talking about big differences. For example, Player A's character has 10,000 GP in equipment, and Player B's character has 20,000 GP in equipment. That's not a small difference, that's a huge difference.
Fighter, 10k in gear:
+1 Full Plate mail (2,650)+1 Falchion (2,375)
+1 Ring of Protection (2,000)
+1 Cloak of Resistance (1,000)
Handy Haversack (2,000)
Same Fighter, 20k in gear can add:
Belt of Giant Strength +2 (+1 to hit and 1.5 to damage)
Amulet of Natural Armor +1 (+1 to AC)
Cloak +2 (additional +1 to all saves)
and still have some gold left over. And this is when the disparity is 10k gold, not 30k or 50k or 70k. And that's just one option... the character could get a 2-stat belt, or add an additional enhancement to the weapon like keen, etc etc... it opens up a lot of options.
But all of this is beside the point. Variations in WBL only matter if the players care about the disparity. Given that some players care about said disparity, it will be a problem for them.
3.p removed the concepts of characters leveling at different rates for a reason. WBL is merely another tool for character improvement and advancement, and in a game where people expect to be equivalently powerful/useful, allowing one player to double the WBL of other players is really no different from saying that while the Wizard is crafting items to double his WBL, the Fighter is training and gains 2 levels during the downtime.
A difference of 10K in WBL is about a +1 in both attack and AC.
It's the difference, at level 5, between the equipment a level 5 character has and the gear a level 7 character has. If you don't think there's a big difference in gear between 5th and 7th, you're playing in some strange games.
But ok, let's make it even a bigger example, perhaps that will make a dent in your armor.
Level 10 :
The guy with 60,000 or the guy with 120,000? Which do you want to be?
Level 15 :
The guy with 250,000 or the guy with 500,000?
Level 20 :
The guy with 900,000 or the guy with 1.8 Million?
If you don't think 10K makes a difference in gear at level 5, I suggest you give all your players twice WBL and see how fast your game blows up. I'm guessing it'll implode about level 8 or 9, when their equipment far outstrips the CR system.
GOOD STUFF
*applause*
As a player I personally wouldn't charge an extra 50% on top of cost unless it fit the characters personality to do so.
Even then, the wizard is still saving said fighter 25% off any items that they desire, so effectively they are increasing the fighters potential WBL (barring any looted items) by 25% or so.
This doesn't necessarily offset the wizards gains but if you look at the fighters gear list again as if the crafting surcharge were applied it would be:
1 Full Plate mail (2,150)
+1 Falchion (1,875)
+1 Ring of Protection (1,500)
+1 Cloak of Resistance (750)
Handy Haversack (1,500)
Total: 7,775, allowing a spare 2,225 gp to be spent.
That can result in an amulet of natural armor +1 (1,500) or a cloak of resistance +2 (3,000), well the cloak is pretty close as he would need an extra 25gp to actually purchase that.
The wizard who is benefiting from the fighters plight is gaining 5,000 gp if he is the fighters dedicated crafter which is on top of his WBL.
So yes the Wizard could effectively have 15,000 gp at level 10, assuming he is only crafting for the fighter.
What I wonder is, what happens if the wizard fails to create the magical item? Is it requested that the wizard purchase the materials in order to create the magic item again? If so that could bring down the wizards WBL.
A difference of 10K in WBL is about a +1 in both attack and AC.It's the difference, at level 5, between the equipment a level 5 character has and the gear a level 7 character has. If you don't think there's a big difference in gear between 5th and 7th, you're playing in some strange games.
But ok, let's make it even a bigger example, perhaps that will make a dent in your armor.
Level 10 :
The guy with 60,000 or the guy with 120,000? Which do you want to be?Level 15 :
The guy with 250,000 or the guy with 500,000?Level 20 :
The guy with 900,000 or the guy with 1.8 Million?If you don't think 10K makes a difference in gear at level 5, I suggest you give all your players twice WBL and see how fast your game blows up. I'm guessing it'll implode about level 8 or 9, when their equipment far outstrips the CR system.
Two questions:
What Does WBL stand for?
Does it say anywhere in the rules that magic item creation feats are not meant as a money making endeavor? I mean it seems bad PRACTICALLY, but is it really a rules issue? It seems being a magic item creator, would be like being a Ren faire or Pensic craftsman. You make enough to get by, but not a whole lot of profit in general.
While I do enjoy 4 pages of *very* heated argument on how important WBL is or isn't or how easy or hard it is to "break" (Not to mention McCarthyism, never heard an argument involving McCarthyism I didn't like!)
I'm curious:
If a character wanted to commission an item from the party Wizard, and they agreed on a price (60%, 70%, 80%, whatever), who here would flat out forbid the transaction to protect WBL?
Two questions:What Does WBL stand for?
Wealth By Level. It's the system guideline on what a character should have, in gear, at a given level. It's in the game mastering section. The game assumes it's about the amount of equipment a character has for purposes of CR balance (challenge rating).
Does it say anywhere in the rules that magic item creation feats are not meant as a money making endeavor? I mean it seems bad PRACTICALLY, but is it really a rules issue? It seems being a magic item creator, would be like being a Ren faire or Pensic craftsman. You make enough to get by, but not a whole lot of profit in general.
Nope,
But it's not crafting mundane stuff, it's the magic item crafting. Even crafting for your teammates just get's them about 25 to 50% over WBL, which is only worth about a 1 level bump in CR. It's when the team crafter not only crafts for everyone, but charges them for it, that things can get broken. He's not only giving everyone a slight boost, but then he's consolidating all their spent wealth in himself and making more equipment from it.
Wealth By Level. It's the system guideline on what a character should have, in gear, at a given level. It's in the game mastering section. The game assumes it's about the amount of equipment a character has for purposes of CR balance (challenge rating).Nope,
But it's not crafting mundane stuff, it's the magic item crafting. Even crafting for your teammates just get's them about 25 to 50% over WBL, which is only worth about a 1 level bump in CR. It's when the team crafter not only crafts for everyone, but charges them for it, that things can get broken. He's not only giving everyone a slight boost, but then he's consolidating all their spent wealth in himself and making more equipment from it.
Many thanks!!!
Thanks for summarizing the argument as well. I know what Wealth by level is it is always just trying to figure out these acronyms that bug me:)
|
Gignere, In my 23 years of gaming experience, I have played in plenty of games where the PCs get to town and sell their loots for the gee-pees. All of their loots. That's why there are guidelines for how much liquid wealth a town of given size has. I think MDTs post is better described as hyperbole, rather than ... that other ... word.
MDT speak from personal experience.
In his old campaign someone started crafting items, the party rose above WBL and waltzed through regular encounters.The reaction was to increase the CR of the monsters, but as the treasure found was raised too that generated even more wealth and even more resources.
At the end that campaign was ruined by excessive players resources (he cited a x5 WBL at high level).
MDT problem is that he don't see any way to manage that kind of situation beside what was done in that campaign and his reaction is to nip the possible problem before its birth.
As I was not there I have no idea if in that particular campaign it would have been possible to resolve the situation in another way, if the problem was the generic capacity to craft stuff or if, as some example he made, like a ring of sustenance and deflection, it was allowing the stacking of bonuses on the same item at a too cheap cost or the player themselves.
My experience is different and so far I haven't noticed particular problems with WBL snowballing thanks to item creation feats.
MDT conclusion that increased WBL will ruin every campaign is based on one of the greatest fallacies in statistic.
His statistical basis is one campaign and it has been ruined by construction feats and a consequent high WBL, so 100% of the campaigns will be ruined by construction feats if they would generate a increase in the party WBL.
On that basis I could say 100% of the cats are black as my cat is black.
A campaign can be as easily ruined by everyone taking the leadership feat and bringing along his cohorts and the cohorts of their cohorts or in a myriad of other ways.
Essentially a campaign is ruined when the players and GM renounce the basic contract that they are there to have fun.
Ashiel has presented the opposite opinion from MDT, saying that in her campaign after level 11 wealth is practically unlimited and all is well.
So it is much more a question of what the GM and players like and find fun than a question of a single facet of the game making it or breaking it.
|
|
Yes, but you're talking about small differences. I've never been talking about small differences. I'm talking about big differences. For example, Player A's character has 10,000 GP in equipment, and Player B's character has 20,000 GP in equipment. That's not a small difference, that's a huge difference.
Sounds to me like you are describing an entirely different problem then the one I was referring to. I'm not talking spotlights. I'm talking about one character having +1 attack/AC/damage/saves than the next guy because he has slightly more gear. No two characters will ever be perfectly balanced, and anyone complaining about small differences is just out looking for trouble.The fact of the matter is both characters have a great deal of value and would likely die horrific deaths if they didn't consistently...
Like one having a +2 weapon and the other having a +3?
Or the first having a +3 armor and the other a +4?Unless B pick your gear with the specific intention to be maximized in what he do and A pick his gear in a unfocused way the difference isn't great.
As Rav stated it is a +1 in attack and damage, AC and saves.
C that will take his 10.000 gp and buy the optimized gear for his intended build can be way more powerful than B if B gear is unfocused.
Hate to burst some bubbles here. but the threads here are like splashes in a stagnant pond. They may make waves here but to no impact anywhere else. Hardly anyone is aware of this little tempest, and even fewer among the most hardened Pathfinder players could care less.Wow. Talk about your mass overreaction. It's threads like this that will ultimately ruin roleplaying and turn Pathfinder into 4E.
Seeing how at least some of us had this discussion in another thread this is so true :D
Like one having a +2 weapon and the other having a +3?
Or the first having a +3 armor and the other a +4?Unless B pick your gear with the specific intention to be maximized in what he do and A pick his gear in a unfocused way the difference isn't great.
As Rav stated it is a +1 in attack and damage, AC and saves.
C that will take his 10.000 gp and buy the optimized gear for his intended build can be way more powerful than B if B gear is unfocused.
You're focusing only on the +1. The issue will not be that A has +1 vs +2 of B.
It's that A will have a +1 weapon and +2 armor. B will have a +2 Weapon, +3 armor, +1 cloak of resistance, +1 amulet of natural armor, and +1 ring of deflection.
Now B has 3 more AC than A, a +1 better to hit and damage, and has +1 to all saves that A doesn't have.
Now multiply that over 5 more levels, and you get A with +2 weapon and +3 armor, and B has +3 weapon, +4 armor, +2 cloak of resistance, +2 amulet of natural armor, a +2 ring of deflection, a boots of springing and striding, a belt of +2 str/+2 con, and a couple of other goodies.
Now B has 5 more AC than A, a +2 better to hit and damage, and a +2 to all saves that A doesn't have. Plus he's faster, and has more hit points.
I really don't understand why I seem to be one of the few people who see this and say 'Woah, yeah, that's not fair to A, he's gonna get hosed'. Creatures that can't hit B are going to switch to A to maul him, because they can't hit B. Ranged attackers will switch to A when they realize he's easier to hit. And before someone says "METAGAMING!", PCs switch targets all the time when they can't hit their AC, and you know it. There's no reason why the PCs can tell that a bad guy is hard to hit and the npcs can't. Doing so is playing the enemies Chaotic Stupid.
You are comparing A to a min/maxing B.
The problem isn't with the wealth, it's with one player optimizing and the other not.
If they were both optimizing in similar fashion, using the wealth given to them, it really would be +1 to +2, not +1 to +4.
In other words, you're not making fair comparisons.
@MDT - I think that overcharging for magic items to PC's becomes "broken" when the wizard is in a bubble. Yes the character could potentially double his income but look at the time it takes to actually break to reach that wealth. To hit 900,000 gold is around two and a half years of non stop crafting, add in adventuring, that takes three years of the character constantly pushing to advance his skill. By the time the character hits that point the necessity for the crafted item could be gone! A 100,000 gold value sword would take over three months to craft.
If anything the caster is going to be selfish and craft for himself when it is necessary.
The time it takes to craft magic items makes it easier to loot a dragons hoard and buy the item rather than try to make it yourself.
Now if the wizard had a time accelerated dimension that could change things :)
I removed some posts. Play nice.
|
|
I really don't understand why I seem to be one of the few people who see this and say 'Woah, yeah, that's not fair to A, he's gonna get hosed'.
Probably because having played through 1rst and 2nd edition and the old D&D difference in powers between players don't faze us so much.
We have seen groups with players with a difference of 4 levels, characters with one 18, two 17, two 16 and a 8 as a starting stats and characters with one 16 and 5 stats between 12 and 14 when only a stat of 15 and above was useful.
And we have seen guys take the characters with slightly above average stats and make them stars while the extra powerful made a lacklustre career.
3rd edition and derivatives enhance the effect of some of the difference more than previous editions but they reduce some other difference more than before.
You see a difference in strength between the party members and think "the weakest is hosed".
I see my players during the game and see that the "weakest" member generally know how to minimize his weaknesses and maximize his strength, that the members of the party will generally collaborate supporting each other, not leaving the "weak" one to be slaughtered while they play primadonna.
It seem that your problem is more a players problem that a game unbalance problem.
"If the player get more WBL he will spend it all on being more powerful."
He has no family? Interest in getting a nice mansion? He will not give anything to the church he support?
I see that my players, if they have extra cash beyond what they truly need, will buy "fluff" items or items that aren't so game breaking (give me 5.000 extra gp and I will buy the comfortable option for my armor, not the Nuklear Wand of Bad JuJu).
I have seen them using limited wish to remove a scar from a NPC that wasn't their love interest simply because "such beauty shouldn't be marred".
Sure they will buy the items to be more powerful, but not to a game breaking level.
Same thing with the items they craft. I have seen people in these forum arguing for a constant ring of CLW with a ridiculously low craft price, but I have never seen anyone even thinking about producing something similar in play.
You are comparing A to a min/maxing B.
The problem isn't with the wealth, it's with one player optimizing and the other not.
If they were both optimizing in similar fashion, using the wealth given to them, it really would be +1 to +2, not +1 to +4.
In other words, you're not making fair comparisons.
Your missing the point RD. It's not that B is min/maxing and A isn't, A doesn't have the same wealth that B does which allows B to spread his wealth and get a bigger bang for his bigger bucks. It's a completely fair comparison. Note that B had a BIGGER bonus on his weapon than A did, not a smaller one. So not only was he having a bigger weapon and better armor, he had the extra funds to spread them around.
If you gave A +1 weapon, +1 armor, +1 amulet, +1 ring, you'd still end up with B having a +3 weapon, +4 armor, +2 amulet, +2 ring, and +2 cloak because he has twice the freaking money to buy them. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Twice the money means twice the options. It's not a complicated concept.
I really don't understand why I seem to be one of the few people who see this and say 'Woah, yeah, that's not fair to A, he's gonna get hosed'.Probably because having played through 1rst and 2nd edition and the old D&D difference in powers between players don't faze us so much.
For your information, I've been a GM for 24 years, and I've run everything from 1st edition Shadowrun to FASA Star Trek to 3rd Ed GURPS to 4th Ed GURPS to 3rd ed Champions to AD&D to 3.0 D&D to 3.5 D&D to Pathfinder to 2nd Ed Vampire to 1st Ed Werewolf to... you get the idea. So talking to me like I'm a neophite is not conducive.
Plus he's faster, and has more hit points.
I really don't understand why I seem to be one of the few people who see this and say 'Woah, yeah, that's not fair to A, he's gonna get hosed'. Creatures that can't hit B are going to switch to A to maul him, because they can't hit B. Ranged attackers will switch to A when they realize he's easier to hit. And before someone says "METAGAMING!", PCs switch targets all the time when they can't hit their AC, and you know it. There's no reason why the PCs can tell that a bad guy is hard to hit and the npcs can't. Doing so is playing the enemies Chaotic Stupid.
So your monster regularly stop focusing on the wizard so they focus on the Fighter? This seems a good thing (now the Fighter can tank).
Remember the Wizard is the one with the extra wealth.
So your monster regularly stop focusing on the wizard so they focus on the Fighter? This seems a good thing (now the Fighter can tank).
Remember the Wizard is the one with the extra wealth.
Unlike a lot of people on the forums, I play my NPCs smart and my animals and non-sentient creatures realistic. Sentient creatures attack the most dangerous enemy they can actually hit. Animals attack the closest creature, or the one they think are most dangerous based on being attacked. So, if the barbarian runs up and does 20 hp, and the rogue they've been fighting does 5, they switch to the barbarian and unload on him. If they get below 25% hp they run.
Intelligent enemies target the most dangerous enemy, which means that yes, the wizard will be priority target if they can figure out he's a wizard. On the other hand, they don't fight stupid either. If there's 8 enemies and 2 of them can't hit the wizard, they'll switch over to someone they can hit, and double team him or triple team him if possible. Archers coordinate fire, firing volleys at the same target or targets, based on range and group dynamics.
For example, two weeks ago, I had 15 archers at 110 feet stand up and start attacking in an ambush. They got surprise round, and 5 attacked PC A, 5 attacked PC B, and 5 Attacked PC C. They continued that the second round, until PC B took off after them and moved really fast (Barbarian), then 10 of them attacked B, and 5 attacked A. This kept up until two PCs were down. The archers would have ran after losing 9 people, but the PCs managed to take out 6 of them in one round, so there was only 3 left to run (and they did).
You mean they didn't shackle you to a desk and force you to become their "crafting slave?" What are the odds!?
haha
Most don't know I can craft anything. I play stupid. I'm an illusionist, I need to hide my abilities.
I actually find these arguments confusing. So a wizard is unwilling to craft things at base price for his fighter because he feels like he should get paid for his time?
What's he doing adventuring? That doesn't sound like soemeon I'd adventure with. I'm putting my big meaty self between him and the stone giant getting hit by freakign fire giants so many times the cleric's mouth is getting numb from sayin "cure critical wounds" a dozen times a day. And the wizard thinks that its not worth investing in keeping me alive? What's he going to do next start charging for alarm spells? Is the cleric going to start earning profit on his raise dead spells? Should the necromancer start charging a transporting fee for his skeletal minion carrying party loot?
To me this sounds like a very very basic teamwork issue. If the wizard doesn't want to craft things, well that's his business but he's not there to make a profit off the rest of the group. It is by association and adventuring with said group he earns a profit, and compared to the average person that profit's monstrous.
"Oh but it costs me days." The wizard says. No it costs you 8 hours, I spend less time at a soul sucking retail job, you can actually do it while adventuring with a harder check.
Anyway this just bugs me because it represents a more deep seated problem. From a GM's standpoint theres nothign you can do but sit and watch.
1 Full Plate mail (2,150)
+1 Falchion (1,875)
+1 Ring of Protection (1,500)
+1 Cloak of Resistance (750)
Handy Haversack (1,500)
Just a side note; in order have all this stuff crafter, the crafter would have to have 3 item creation feats (Arms, Wondrous and Ring) and be 7th level (for rings). At 7th level that's 3 of the 7 normal feats a wizard gets (ignoring race), which is a large character investment in crafting. And it's even worse for other classes that might go this route. He'll be weaker in the other wizardly aspects and the extra equipment helps compensate.
Now I fully understand the concerns about the entire group being well above WBL, but I think if the crafter is 'more' above WBL than the rest of the party, it's less of a concern, and especially dependent on what the crafter spends it on. And few crafters can actually make everything they might want without getting every crafting feat in existence, so they'll still be buying stuff at full price (never mind that they might not have the free time to make 30,000gp+ items).
The theoretical horror probably breaks down a bit in actual gameplay...YMMV.
Wow. Talk about your mass overreaction. It's threads like this that will ultimately ruin roleplaying and turn Pathfinder into 4E.
The game is NOT broken by the item creation feats. The game only breaks down when nobody is having fun. Has this happened in your game? If so, it's not because of the feats, it's because of bad GMing or immature players.
If someone can't handle something as simple as the disparity between one character having 3 or 4 more items than another, than maybe they need to stop whining about it, find a new hobby, and quit ruining everyone's fun with their incessant negative attitude.
I like when someone makes sense.
What's he doing adventuring? That doesn't sound like soemeon I'd adventure with. I'm putting my big meaty self between him and the stone giant getting hit by freakign fire giants so many times the cleric's mouth is getting numb from sayin "cure critical wounds" a dozen times a day. And the wizard thinks that its not worth investing in keeping me alive?
Please. Wizards take just as much risks in adventures as fighters...they have lower AC (generally), smart enemies consider them to be priority targets, and they have a much smaller pad of HP to keep them alive. EVERYBODY in an adventure is sharing the risks and suffering the damage. It's not all the fighter in the front.
And a wizard's time is actually precious. Everything they do takes time*. Scribe a spell? TIME. Research a spell? MORE TIME. Make a magic item? STILL MORE TIME. Most spellcasters have to prioritize their time in this manner. Fighters? Not so much, so they regard 'downtime' as worthless, because to them it is. This is not true for all classes!
*and money.
What's he doing adventuring? That doesn't sound like soemeon I'd adventure with. I'm putting my big meaty self between him and the stone giant getting hit by freakign fire giants so many times the cleric's mouth is getting numb from sayin "cure critical wounds" a dozen times a day. And the wizard thinks that its not worth investing in keeping me alive?Please. Wizards take just as much risks in adventures as fighters...they have lower AC (generally), smart enemies consider them to be priority targets, and they have a much smaller pad of HP to keep them alive. EVERYBODY in an adventure is sharing the risks and suffering the damage. It's not all the fighter in the front.
And a wizard's time is actually precious. Everything they do takes time*. Scribe a spell? TIME. Research a spell? MORE TIME. Make a magic item? STILL MORE TIME. Most spellcasters have to prioritize their time in this manner. Fighters? Not so much, so they regard 'downtime' as worthless, because to them it is. This is not true for all classes!
*and money.
That's kind of the point I was trying to make.
It doesn't mean you punish the fighter for a part of your class. Also it is the fighter's money we're discussing here.
In fact that fighter could argue he should be able to charge more. It takes two feats and a ton more skill points for him to do what the wizard does, that's a greater investment.
And who says the fighter is doing nothing while the wizard is locked in his room wiht his books? I know oen or two players who twiddle their thumbs but my fighters tend to head towards the nearest barely legal bare knuckle boxing ring and start busting heads, or gathering information, or you know, doing normal people things like hang out around town and again you can be making this crap on the road.
And who says the fighter is doing nothing while the wizard is locked in his room wiht his books? I know oen or two players who twiddle their thumbs but my fighters tend to head towards the nearest barely legal bare knuckle boxing ring and start busting heads, or gathering information, or you know, doing normal people things like hang out around town and again you can be making this crap on the road.
Pretty much the argument I have run.
According to the miserly wizards looking to get rich off their friends, the Wizard is the only one doing any real work, and should be compensated.
Apparently Rogues don't develop networks to fence goods through, Fighters don't train and get information, and onward for any other class except the poor wizard who suffers in silence, shackled to the crafting bench and forced into domestic duties all day by their uncaring friends who simply take them for granted, so why SHOULDN'T the wizard be spending their paychecks on a new pair of shoes and a dress?
Rogues and Melee are the 'life of the party', Wizards are apparently the 'wife' of it.
That's one of the many reasons I prefer sorcerers these days: They often don't look like wizards (and instead can resemble bards, rogues, and other similar classes). As such, I don't get targeted as much even by clever enemies unless I break out the flashy spells.
Also, when I DO play a crafting wizard, I'm often happy to make things for my friends at cost if I'm not already in the middle of crafting things for myself. Sometimes, I even gift them with unexpected items that I think would help the party. More often than not though, they choose to pay me above cost for my time anyways.
But I guess that just means my group is special. :D