And Pathfinder Society (paper) is the EXACT same format as most MMOs (pixels). That is factual information.
.... because MMO's used Pen and Paper RPG's as the basis for their games perhaps?
Seriously, any time you say mmo its coming across like a slap in the face to everyone here, for no reason.
|
And Pathfinder Society (paper) is the EXACT same format as most MMOs (pixels). That is factual information.
.... because MMO's used Pen and Paper RPG's as the basis for their games perhaps?
Seriously, any time you say mmo its coming across like a slap in the face to everyone here, for no reason.
If you play Pathfinder Society, you are playing a common MMO on paper. Not a slap in the face. That is simple what it is. It is not meant to be insulting or rude. It is just a simple fact. Roleplaying is something completely different.
If you play Pathfinder Society, you are playing a common MMO on paper.
MMO= massively. Multiplayer. ONELINE. Pathfinder Society is played largely (exclusively?) face to face, just like any other role playing game. How much like a video game it is depends entirely on the person sitting with their rump in a seat.
Not a slap in the face. That is simple what it is. It is not meant to be insulting or rude. It is just a simple fact. Roleplaying is something completely different.
This is as objectively wrong as your previous statement. Role playing is something a person does. Pen and paper vs online is simply the MEDIUM by which it happens. Whether someone plays in character or treats it like a video game is up to them: I've seen people in at a table treat everything like a walking pile of XP and i've seen people in mmo's stay in character through a dungeon.
Also, you're still harping on the already disproven idea that people want crafting to be different because of anything to do with mmo's. The objections, that you're completely ignoring because they don't fit within your preconceived narative, are largely story or use based. MMO's have nothing to do with it. You're not arguing for your position, you're insulting for it.
Realistic crafting is for realistic folk.
Over-the-top crafting is for over-the-top folk.
PCs over level 10 are over-the-top.
It's not MMO, it's grand fantasy.
Please, OP & OP sycophants, stop obsessing over gritty fantasy and painting everything with that brush. Consider a world with more than level 1-5 thinking.
Which is exactly why it would be nice to have crafting times based on reality and not value. The amount of money you can earn by crafting should be governed by profession since it's the ability to actually sell, not to just make things, and it's actually the thing that needs to be ballanced. Problem with that is that after obtaining loot everything must be convertible to other useable resources.
...this articleExcellent article. I suggest everyone read it.
As a side point, this would explain why everyone does not become a wizard.
Outstanding article!
Executive summary:
-
- Almost everyone is 1st level.
- The most impressive real people to ever exist are probably 5th level at most.
- The d20 system does a good job of letting specialized 1st level characters be very good at most tasks, and 5th level characters be world record breakers.
- If we assume that 6th level and higher characters represent superhuman ability, our expectations of the game will be much more inline with design intentions, and we'll be happier with our games.
|
|
If you play Pathfinder Society, you are playing a common MMO on paper.MMO= massively. Multiplayer. ONELINE. Pathfinder Society is played largely (exclusively?) face to face, just like any other role playing game. How much like a video game it is depends entirely on the person sitting with their rump in a seat.
Not a slap in the face. That is simple what it is. It is not meant to be insulting or rude. It is just a simple fact. Roleplaying is something completely different.This is as objectively wrong as your previous statement. Role playing is something a person does. Pen and paper vs online is simply the MEDIUM by which it happens. Whether someone plays in character or treats it like a video game is up to them: I've seen people in at a table treat everything like a walking pile of XP and i've seen people in mmo's stay in character through a dungeon.
Also, you're still harping on the already disproven idea that people want crafting to be different because of anything to do with mmo's. The objections, that you're completely ignoring because they don't fit within your preconceived narative, are largely story or use based. MMO's have nothing to do with it. You're not arguing for your position, you're insulting for it.
Wrong.
Most current MMOs are designed after the game World of Warcraft (unfortunately). Pathfinder Society is designed essentially the same way as WoW is. You have a character that logs in or shows up at a table. That character gains levels via questing and killing monsters. That character also collects money of some sort. That character then purchases upgrades to said character with the money. Rinse/repeat. There is no roleplaying involved. In Pathfinder Society, as in WoW, you can show up any time you want, pick up a different quest/module and level. When you are done, you have nothing other than a time sink.
Feel free to tell me about the miniscule amount of people who stay in character in an MMO and I will tell you about the same amount of people who do it in the Society.
At any point that you try to compare Pathfinder Society to roleplaying, you have failed in your argument. Start over.
Maybe reread what I typed. You have it half right at the end. It is the medium. Pen and paper MMO concept is the same as virtual MMO concept. You are just using a different medium on a smaller scale.
Most current MMOs are designed after the game World of Warcraft (unfortunately). Pathfinder Society is designed essentially the same way as WoW is. You have a character that logs in or shows up at a table. That character gains levels via questing and killing monsters. That character also collects money of some sort. That character then purchases upgrades to said character with the money. Rinse/repeat.
Would you mind telling me how on earth this is vastly different from Raven's Bluff, Which Debuted in 1987?
Feel free to tell me about the miniscule amount of people who stay in character in an MMO and I will tell you about the same amount of people who do it in the Society.
Find different people to play with then.
At any point that you try to compare Pathfinder Society to roleplaying, you have failed in your argument. Start over.
You should spend less time crowing over your victory and some time at least achieving it.
Feel free to tell me about the miniscule amount of people who stay in...
Miniscule number of people. Individual people can be counted, and are therefore not collectivized as an "amount."
I have not been able to find a Society game to join and I've looked. After reading up on what is entails, I could find nothing that even hinted that roleplaying was discouraged or not possible.
Just like many others here, I have been gaming for several decades (more than 30 years). During that time, I have seen all kinds of different groups from around the country. My own style of game has evolved. I hope most other people's have as well.
The reason why many of us do not like the crafting rules (and I'm one of them) is that they are unnecessarily complex and based off a flawed premise (that expensive items take longer to create). The rules make it so that some things can't be achieved in the game with reasonable time frames.
Remember that this is really just a game. If you aren't having fun with parts of it, then those parts needs to be changed. The crafting rules are disliked by far more gamers than those who like them. There have been plenty of ways to address the problems in a variety of groups. What works for one group may not work for another.
I would love to make a ranger who lives off the land and crafts his own gear. It would be difficult to do so under the current system. Pathfinder has allowed for non-casters to create magic items, which would work, but at the lower levels it just falls apart. Even then, as the ranger would be leveling, his bow would be less and less effective before he even has a chance to finish the creation.
Pathfinder is a high fantasy game. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some high fantasy item creation. I understand that if it's looked at too hard, the economy can fall apart, but I wouldn't want to play in a game where the GM is so focused on the economy and crafting integration that I would be playing a level 6 accountant. I want to play a high fantasy character. The crafting rules do not allow for that.
I'd like to quote from a Song of Ice and Fire, the legend of the forging of Lighbringer
Darkness lay over the world and a hero, Azor Ahai, was chosen to fight against it. To fight the darkness, Azor Ahai needed to forge a hero's sword. He labored for thirty days and thirty nights until it was done. However, when he went to temper it in water, the sword broke. He was not one to give up easily, so he started over. The second time he took fifty days and fifty nights to make the sword, even better than the first. To temper it this time, he captured a lion and drove the sword into its heart, but once more the steel shattered. The third time, with a heavy heart, for he knew beforehand what he must do to finish the blade, he worked for a hundred days and nights until it was finished. This time, he called for his wife, Nissa Nissa, and asked her to bare her breast. He drove his sword into her breast, her soul combining with the steel of the sword, creating Lightbringer.
1 Month, close to 2 months, a little over 3 months (and a human sacrifice) to create one of the most badass artifacts in that world. That is fantasy crafting.
Azor Ahai was also a major legendary warrior so crafting a magical/artifact weapon in a relatively short time is appropriate. While Pathfinder is considerably higher magic then a Song of Ice and Fire this literary example still holds.
Also it didn't take the Elven smiths of Rivendell months to reforge Narsil into Andúril, and those Elves would have qualified as quite high-level for the world... you know being ageless and all.
"You can sleep here. It will take me a month to make the sword. I suggest you spend it practicing."
-- Hattori Hanzo (Kill Bill).
A month to craft the best sword ever made.
You contradict yourself. You say you have no experience yet you agree with me. Huh?I do not see roleplaying as MMOs...Me neither. Although I don't have any experience with MMOs...
How do I contradict myself. I said that I agreed that I also do not see roleplaying as the same as an MMO, but my reasoning for such is that I do not have any experience with MMOs to be able to equate them.
And Pathfinder Society (paper) is the EXACT same format as most MMOs (pixels). That is factual information.
Citation?
"You can sleep here. It will take me a month to make the sword. I suggest you spend it practicing."
-- Hattori Hanzo (Kill Bill).A month to craft the best sword ever made.
By a master swordsman no less. Hattori Hanzo was a high level ninja before he was ever a swordsmith (look it up).
"You can sleep here. It will take me a month to make the sword. I suggest you spend it practicing."
-- Hattori Hanzo (Kill Bill).A month to craft the best sword ever made.
Not bad. 30 days to create that sword with modern technology.
49 days (consistently rolling DC 25) to create a masterwork bastard sword (the equivalent d20 item) using medieval technology. Seems reasonable.
1 Month, close to 2 months, a little over 3 months (and a human sacrifice) to create one of the most badass artifacts in that world. That is fantasy crafting.
Yeah, 180 days (6 months) for a 131,000 gp or so item plus masterwork sword in d20 equivalents. That doesn't seem too far out of line.
At any point that you try to compare Pathfinder Society to roleplaying, you have failed in your argument. Start over.
Wait... Pathfinder isn't a roleplaying game? But when I scroll up to the top of this screen right underneath the Paizo logo is a pretty logo that says Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. How can I play a roleplaying game, without roleplaying? It's in the title of the game. That would be like playing a chess game, without playing chess, and that just blows my mind.
"You can sleep here. It will take me a month to make the sword. I suggest you spend it practicing."
-- Hattori Hanzo (Kill Bill).A month to craft the best sword ever made.
Not bad. 30 days to create that sword with modern technology.
49 days (consistently rolling DC 25) to create a masterwork bastard sword (the equivalent d20 item) using medieval technology. Seems reasonable.
1 Month, close to 2 months, a little over 3 months (and a human sacrifice) to create one of the most badass artifacts in that world. That is fantasy crafting.Yeah, 180 days (6 months) for a 131,000 gp or so item plus masterwork sword in d20 equivalents. That doesn't seem too far out of line.
The point was those (even the Kill Bill) are kinda the high end of the "fantasy smithing" scale. It wasn't 180 days crafting, it was 100 days and two failed attempts prior. Around 100,000 based on time alone.
Now lets throw in the actual crafting the Masterwork longsword. We will assume Arzor Ahai can hits a roll/DC 25 reliably for the sake of simplification.
Longsword: 150 SP, DC 25 (rush), progress per day ~89 SP, days to complete 2
Masterwork: 3000 SP, DC 20 (no rush) progess per week 500, 6 weeks (63 days
Total build time 65 days per Masterwork longsword.
The first two builds were just Masterwork longswords. Technically he didn't even finish the first build. I'll give him the 2nd with some high desperation/luck rolls.
The final build pulls 63 days off the 100, leaving us with 37. Magic swords get priced at 1000 per day. Does 37,000 GP sound right for Lightbringer? That's just a shade over a +4 weapon. Assuming WBL this should put (if this is a level appropriate weapon) Arzor Ahai around 13th level.
Hattori Hanzo was a high level ninja before he was ever a swordsmith (look it up).
Quasi-historical figure aside, I'm a Sonny Chiba fan anyway -- I even liked "The Street Fighter" (the '70s chock-sockey flick; not the video game).
Not bad. 30 days to create that sword with modern technology.
Have you seen the film? We're given no indication he used modern technology, and the amount of traditionalism and ritual surrounding the crafting strongly suggests otherwise.
But, yeah, that's a far sight from 65 days to complete a totally unremarkable mwk longsword.
By a master swordsman no less. Hattori Hanzo was a high level ninja before he was ever a swordsmith (look it up)."You can sleep here. It will take me a month to make the sword. I suggest you spend it practicing."
-- Hattori Hanzo (Kill Bill).A month to craft the best sword ever made.
That's masterwork component for a weapon in something under three weeks.
Now Hatori would need to be able to reach about 29 while taking 10 to make mwk katana in 4 weeks (30 actually to beat DC for accelerated masterwork crafting)
3000 sp for mwk component - with craft 30 about 24 days
500 sp for the katana - with craft 30 about 4 days
So what do I need to achieve that?
+3 (skill focus)
+2 (aid another)
+8 (skill ranks)
+2 (ability modifier)
+2 (mwk tools)
+3 (class skill)
+10 (take 10)
Yup, level 8 guy can do it and he doesn't even need to be a genius.
Now if it was adamantine *shiver*
I think that if the skill SPECIFICALLY stated that the usage of skill includes obtaining the material (I mean actually buying adamantine ore, where there is normally none on the markets, ...) and allowed the player that stumbles upon a lump of adamantine to craft faster it would be fine, but this isn't part of the rules.
That's why the crafting time needs to be based on item complexity and dissociated from actual market price.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For those stating that the players are MMOing the game when they want to craft items faster I'd like to point out that craft-bent wizards from level 9 can craft two adamantine weapons per day just by using his 5th level slots PROVIDED THEY HAVE THE ADAMANTINE, so why does my *insert other class without fabricate* at this level of experience has to work for 233 days to achieve the same result PROVIDED I ALREADY HAVE THE ADAMANTINE. Why shouldn't I be able to make it in about one month like with about any other mwk thing?
|
|
For those stating that the players are MMOing the game when they want to craft items faster I'd like to point out that craft-bent wizards from level 9 can craft two adamantine weapons per day just by using his 5th level slots PROVIDED THEY HAVE THE ADAMANTINE, so why does my *insert other class without fabricate* at this level of experience has to work for 233 days to achieve the same result PROVIDED I ALREADY HAVE THE ADAMANTINE. Why shouldn't I be able to make it in about one month like with about any other mwk thing?
My take on that would be, magic. If magic can't do things that the mundane can't what exactly makes it magic?
Complete unrelated to D&D but if we look at X-men, it took years of research to work out how to handle adamantine to work with it. So perhaps even in D&D working with adamantine is more complicated then hitting it harder in a hotter fire to shape it?
No answers, just thoughts,
S.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Irranshalee, you are one crazy troll
You've managed to lay insults to
- Anyeone who plays PFS, saying that they don't roleplay
- Everyone who plays MMOs, saying that they can't roleplay and do nothing more than upgrade a character
- Everyone who dislikes the current crafting rules, saying that they are just power gamers
You also managed to show your ignorance:
That's masterwork component for a weapon in something under three weeks.
Yup, level 8 guy can do it and he doesn't even need to be a genius.
Sure, but we're looking at the awesomest sword in the entire setting, one that's described as literally being "priceless" (i.e., infinite crafting time under RAW). This is a campaign setting in which the main PC can use quivering palm and can survive being shot in the head and buried alive -- nothing "mundane" or "low magic" about it. So assuming the Bride's sword is the equivalent of a +5 weapon, or even vorpal (witness the top of O-Ren's head) isn't totally outrageous.
To make a +5 equivalent sword (50,000 gp value) should take Hanzo 50 days, plus the 28 days masterwork time you listed above = 78 days, not 30.
It wasn't 180 days crafting, it was 100 days and two failed attempts prior.
*shrug* I presume that mistakes, etc, are part of the overall process. So yeah, I'm going with 180 days.
(6 weeks is 63 days?)
I don't really know what "high end of the scale" is, and whether that's even meaningful in any way. A couple of posters gave examples, I gave their d20 equivalents and time. That's it, that's all. It's up to each person to decide whether that's reasonable for their tastes or not. For me, I found the Craft results to be reasonable.
Have you seen the film? We're given no indication he used modern technology, and the amount of traditionalism and ritual surrounding the crafting strongly suggests otherwise.
Yeah, great movie. And we're given no indication he's using entirely medieval tools and techniques, either, one viewer's perceived "traditionalism" notwithstanding and the film takes place in the late 90's. But, 19 more days for a masterwork bastard sword (which is the d20 equivalent, I'm afraid) is close enough, AFAIC.
I understand you want to make it magic of some sort, but, while it's a nice sword, it is just a mundane item. (I would say that Kill Bill is just a very poor example, and we should probably forget it.)
Sure, but we're looking at the awesomest sword in the entire setting, one that's described as literally being "priceless"That's masterwork component for a weapon in something under three weeks.
Yup, level 8 guy can do it and he doesn't even need to be a genius.
Meh, priceless only means you can't buy it. ;-)
That's masterwork component for a weapon in something under three weeks.
Yup, level 8 guy can do it and he doesn't even need to be a genius.Sure, but we're looking at the awesomest sword in the entire setting, one that's described as literally being "priceless" (i.e., infinite crafting time under RAW). This is a campaign setting in which the main PC can use quivering palm and can survive being shot in the head and buried alive -- nothing "mundane" or "low magic" about it. So assuming the Bride's sword is the equivalent of a +5 weapon, or even vorpal (witness the top of O-Ren's head) isn't totally outrageous.
To make a +5 equivalent sword (50,000 gp value) should take Hanzo 50 days, plus the 28 days masterwork time you listed above = 78 days, not 30.
Well, the sword wasn't anywhere stated as magic or anything. We don't have the advanced masterwork options as they are present in the Game of Thrones d20 for example, so it's probably just mwk. It was focused on the character, not on magic accessories. Most kung-fu stories are actually bent on showing the abilities of the people alone.
...
My take on that would be, magic. If magic can't do things that the mundane can't what exactly makes it magic?
Complete unrelated to D&D but if we look at X-men, it took years of research to work out how to handle adamantine to work with it. So perhaps even in D&D working with adamantine is more complicated then hitting it harder in a hotter fire to shape it?
No answers, just thoughts,
S.
Like I said - if the craft time is "obtain material + make an item" than it could work (precious materials are precious because they are rare afterall). In the moment it becomes just "make an item", it becomes a tragedy. When the characters stumble upon an adamantine mine, it shouldn't take them THAT (better half of the year) long to craft something even without magic.
EDIT: And once you find out how to work adamantine it still takes the years to repeat the process? And yes, the wizard can still do it without the research. Instantly.
|
|
And once you find out how to work adamantine it still takes the years to repeat the process? And yes, the wizard can still do it without the research. Instantly.
Magic vs Non-magic. The fighter can jump up in the air every minute of every day and never learn to fly. The wizard can cast one 3rd level spell and 'up, up, and away'.
S.
Magic vs Non-magic. The fighter can jump up in the air every minute of every day and never learn to fly. The wizard can cast one 3rd level spell and 'up, up, and away'.
Then cap the fighter at 5th level. Seriously. If mundane characters can't ever do anything that's not completely "realistic," don't even pretend they can be 15th level.
And once you find out how to work adamantine it still takes the years to repeat the process? And yes, the wizard can still do it without the research. Instantly.Magic vs Non-magic. The fighter can jump up in the air every minute of every day and never learn to fly. The wizard can cast one 3rd level spell and 'up, up, and away'.
S.
And once again you get toward caster vs. noncaster where the noncaster is shafted.
And if the noncaster took month instead of half a year it would mean that the caster would get his WOW effect (I mean just simple wow of amazement, no connection to the World of Warcraft) from using the spell for doing it instantly and the others would get a more manageable crafting time where thy don't grow beards that even manage to turn white from age.
|
|
Magic vs Non-magic. The fighter can jump up in the air every minute of every day and never learn to fly. The wizard can cast one 3rd level spell and 'up, up, and away'.Then cap the fighter at 5th level. Seriously. If mundane characters can't ever do anything that's not completely "realistic," don't even pretend they can be 15th level.
You take my comment to an illogical extreme, and it's never what I was refering too. Can we have a civil discussion, or has this thread got to bogged down with back-handed sniping?
What I was saying was, and this has become a problem since the games 'new' direction, is we seem now to need to codify mundane vs magic. Yes MORE rules - welcome to d20. Any effect that requires MAGIC should not be the realm of the humble fighter (without augmentation). So is working with adamantine a feat of magical or physical prowess? I really have no idea. d20 is almost getting to the stage where it should consider becoming a fully Skill-based system rather than this hybrid Class/Skill-system behemoth that it is. Effectively by getting enough 'base-classes', 'prestiage-classes', and 'archetypes' - coupled with the multiclassing rules it is almost a Skill-based system, but using a very confusing and complicated method.
S.
You take my comment to an illogical extreme, and it's never what I was refering to.
That's exactly where your comment leads; without any exaggeration or extremes involved. Characters above 10th level are in superhero territory; limiting their abilities to mundane pursuits, but giving casters a free pass, is exactly the problem.
Can we have a civil discussion, or has this thread got to bogged down with back-handed sniping?
As I was being completely serious, there is nothing at all back-handed about my opinion on the matter. If martial characters are to be crippled in their abilities because they can't do magic, then we should cap their progression to demonstrate their inability to do heroic things (like forge adamantine swords for themselves within a reasonable time span). Alternatively, if we accept that mundane characters can be heroic, too -- then we need to likewise accept that they can do heroic things, and that means expanding our ideas of what can be accomplished without magic.
|
|
You take my comment to an illogical extreme, and it's never what I was refering to.That's exactly where your comment leads; without any exaggeration or extremes involved. Characters above 10th level are in superhero territory; limiting their abilities to mundane pursuits, but giving casters a free pass, is exactly the problem.
I see now perhaps you came to 'D&D' at a later time than I did (conjecture, but I'll run with it). For me I still, wrongly perhaps, I have the idea that all characters with levels are heroic from level 1 up. Where a 5th level NPC fighter would likely be the captain of an entire castle. Levels in commoner or expert seem a strange and frankly unuseful concept to me. Ideas I gained during my 1e AD&D RPG formative years. The whole idea of the ease of making magic items still doesn't still well with me. I remember in the 80's having a quest to make a single potion (meaning getting the ingredients) - even scroll making was difficult, Hippogriff quill anyone?
Where is it written that 5th-10th = heroic & 11th+ = superhero? I know this type of concept is in 4e D&D but I have missed where PF replicates this - but I am happy to be corrected.
S.
I see now perhaps you came to 'D&D' at a later time than I did (conjecture, but I'll run with it).
I started in 1980, so that's certainly possible, albeit not extremely likely. But that's relatively unimportant, because Monte threw 1e/2e out the window when designing 3e, so we're stuck with his ideas as the foundations of Pathfinder -- not Dave's and Gary's.
Where is it written that 5th-10th = heroic & 11th+ = superhero? I know this type of concept is in 4e D&D but I have missed where PF replicates this - but I am happy to be corrected.
When your 11th level fighter can fall off a 10,000-ft. cliff and get up and dust himself off, with no magic involved? That's superhero territory, to me, because it's not a regularly reproducable feat in real life. In 1e pits were dangerous at 10th level because of HD caps and the way Con bonuses to hp worked, but those days are long gone. In 3.X it's almost impossible to kill anyone at that level by the mere equivalent of falling out of an airplane (even if you use massive damage rules). Likewise, an 11th level wizard is binding demons to his will that can slaughter literal armies of almost any size with relative impunity, and the plain vanilla mundane fighter is supposed to be easily able to go toe-to-toe with these same demons.
I agree that crafting (and especially buying) magic items is too easy in 3.X for my personal taste, but the entire 3.0 framework (and by extension 3.5 and PF) is predicated on a paradigm in which PCs can do that. Given that, intentionally making it harder for fighters (who desperately need magic weapons and armor and belts) and easier for wizards (who don't) is completely backwards, to me.
You take my comment to an illogical extreme, and it's never what I was refering to.That's exactly where your comment leads; without any exaggeration or extremes involved. Characters above 10th level are in superhero territory; limiting their abilities to mundane pursuits, but giving casters a free pass, is exactly the problem.I see now perhaps you came to 'D&D' at a later time than I did (conjecture, but I'll run with it). For me I still, wrongly perhaps, I have the idea that all characters with levels are heroic from level 1 up. Where a 5th level NPC fighter would likely be the captain of an entire castle. Levels in commoner or expert seem a strange and frankly unuseful concept to me. Ideas I gained during my 1e AD&D RPG formative years. The whole idea of the ease of making magic items still doesn't still well with me. I remember in the 80's having a quest to make a single potion (meaning getting the ingredients) - even scroll making was difficult, Hippogriff quill anyone?
Where is it written that 5th-10th = heroic & 11th+ = superhero? I know this type of concept is in 4e D&D but I have missed where PF replicates this - but I am happy to be corrected.
S.
Certainly, a level 1 Fighter is probably more powerful and heroic than a level 1 Warrior, let alone a level 1 commoner. No one here denies that levels 1-5 can be heroic, for both casters and fighters. But, doing the math, as in the Alexandrian article which has been linked a few times in this thread, shows that levels 1-5 are a fairly 'gritty' level range, where expectations can be calibrated more or less against the real world. Fighter-types at this level are well-trained soldiers, or powerful thugs, more or less as we would understand the terms in the real world. Even casters get in on it to an extent. They have magical powers, but they are relatively limited. As levels rise beyond 5th, and especially as they enter the double digits, character capabilities increasingly become more-or-less explicitly superheroic. This is most apparent in caster classes, as their magic becomes increasingly earthshaking in its effects and implications. But even the most humble fighter soon reaches the point where they can leap from towering cliffs, or even swim in lava and survive, strike with unparalleled speed/unleash a veritable hail of arrows, and routinely exceed Olympic records without even making an effort.
Kirth's point is that the game ultimately shies away from fully embracing this fundamental truth of the game. Any power the casters have is justified by it being 'magic', but fighter-types are continuously held to a standard of realism which becomes increasingly absurd when they have left so many other mortal restrictions behind.
If the casters get to gad about as Green Lantern, then the fighters should rise to the level of Captain America and the G!**+%ned Batman, if not Wolverine or even The Incredible Hulk.
|
|
Given that, intentionally making it harder for fighters (who desperately need magic weapons and armor and belts) and easier for wizards (who don't) is completely backwards, to me.
Preaching to the converted Sir. 3e super-charged wizards, removed most of the things that made them glass-cannons and then left the mess for Paizo to try to sort out while they (meaning WotC) ran off from the train wreck 3.5e became to produce 4e...
Paizo has done well and I think from the caliber of ideas from Paizo rules-wise the sooner they are disentangled from the lodestone of '3e compatiabilty' the better.
S.
rules-wise the sooner they are disentangled from the lodestone of '3e compatiabilty' the better.
Amen. At my home game, we play a PF heavily modified to restore some 1e sensibilities: casters can no longer move while casting, whereas fighters can move and attack, for example; and disrupting spellcasting is a LOT easier. But we've also retained the 3.X emphasis on higher-level characters being able to do really outrageous things. Yes, the wizard can cast gate -- but the high-level fighter can make attacks of opportunity against someone 30 feet away; can use tactical reasoning to deduce the real location of invisible, displaced, or projected-image opponents; and can shoot a dragon or a flying wizard out of the sky without being too worried about the outcome.
|
|
casters can no longer move while casting, whereas fighters can move and attack, for example
I see that simple rule as a HUGE step in the right direction. The balance of Melee vs Caster developed under 3e was to try to beef-up the Melee classes - I say, as you have done, a change to the underlaying mechanics of casting is the key. Your idea is far more rule efficient than trying to change every melee class - and maintain balance.
S.
Your idea is far more rule efficient than trying to change every melee class - and maintain balance.
That's a start, and it extends the melee guys' shelf life a bit, but under the insane power levels of 3.5, it's not a total fix. So I did redo every melee class, and most of the combat feats while I was at it, and I like to think that I'm gradually approaching a game with 3e's complexity and breadth of options, and 1e's idea of balance between classes.
OK, I thought that I had made peace with crafting via my houserules, but obviously I haven't because one major element still troubles me.
On one hand, I like the verisimilitude that commoners can't get stinking by crafting 12 super-expensive items per years, because crafting expensive stuff is slow.
On the other hand, I appreciate the practicality of "fantasy crafting" as an abstraction that should primarily address the situations of the players and by extension, heroic characters.
If crafting times are reduced, the net gp/day increases*, making commoners altogether richer.
Should that be an issue.
Obviously, this assumes that the craftsman manages to sell 100% of its stocks with 0% efforts. In this perhaps lies the missing part of the economical equation to keep some degrees of verisimilitude.
What about just added a divisor at the end of the formula based on level? So it becomes;
Time to Build / Level (or Level/2 or something)? The more heroic you are the faster you can build that "Weapon of Destiny (tm)".
Yes, or something along those lines.
The craftsman craft his stuff at 33% of the market value, but sell it at 50% to a merchant who will then sell it to the populace. In most case, the 'craftsman' and the 'merchant' is the same person, only he or she cannot be crafting and selling simultaneously, therefore limiting profits in both departments etc.
For the players there is no impact. It only make the rest of the economics a bit more believable...
|
What about just added a divisor at the end of the formula based on level? So it becomes;
Time to Build / Level (or Level/2 or something)? The more heroic you are the faster you can build that "Weapon of Destiny (tm)".
Yes, or something along those lines.
The craftsman craft his stuff at 33% of the market value, but sell it at 50% to a merchant who will then sell it to the populace. In most case, the 'craftsman' and the 'merchant' is the same person, only he or she cannot be crafting and selling simultaneously, therefore limiting profits in both departments etc.
For the players there is no impact. It only make the rest of the economics a bit more believable...
Odd, I mentioned something like this about 4 pages ago.
|
|
Odd, I mentioned something like this about 4 pages ago.What about just added a divisor at the end of the formula based on level? So it becomes;
Time to Build / Level (or Level/2 or something)? The more heroic you are the faster you can build that "Weapon of Destiny (tm)".
Yes, or something along those lines.
The craftsman craft his stuff at 33% of the market value, but sell it at 50% to a merchant who will then sell it to the populace. In most case, the 'craftsman' and the 'merchant' is the same person, only he or she cannot be crafting and selling simultaneously, therefore limiting profits in both departments etc.
For the players there is no impact. It only make the rest of the economics a bit more believable...
You find it odd you mentioned it? How so? ;)
|
|
You find it odd you mentioned it? How so? ;)Odd, I mentioned something like this about 4 pages ago.What about just added a divisor at the end of the formula based on level? So it becomes;
Time to Build / Level (or Level/2 or something)? The more heroic you are the faster you can build that "Weapon of Destiny (tm)".
Yes, or something along those lines.
The craftsman craft his stuff at 33% of the market value, but sell it at 50% to a merchant who will then sell it to the populace. In most case, the 'craftsman' and the 'merchant' is the same person, only he or she cannot be crafting and selling simultaneously, therefore limiting profits in both departments etc.
For the players there is no impact. It only make the rest of the economics a bit more believable...
That it's coming back around to something I considered an obvious fix.