Hey there, Mistwalker. I appreciate your concerns, and in fact, am not entirely disagreeing with you. And I think what Shifty was doing was addressing a specific argument, and attempting to reverse it. In fact, he kind of stated that was exactly what he was doing. :)
As for the rest, you're really, really putting words into my mouth. It also sounds rather confrontational, and rude. I'm not sure that's intended, though?
Part of the trouble we run into when addressing an issue like crafting is that it's highly complex. Not only is crafting highly beneficial, it can be detrimental. Drawing "a line," then, is hard and best done by speaking with the group directly.
In fact, I said that too. So where's the hostility coming from?
I think overall, that this is the issue:
All other players: 1,540,000 (880,000 + 660,000) gold pieces worth of magic gear.
Player X: 2,640,000 (1,760,000 + 880,000) gold pieces worth of magic gear.
I think the concern is the difference in relative wealth that ends up occurring. Granted, the PC did spend a feat.
But how much is a feat worth, exactly? Every player gets 10, not counting bonus feats, wizard bonus feats, ranger style feats, human bonus...and so on.
Right now, the wealth is what, half again everyone else's? A third? Is a single feat worth 30% wealth? 50%? Can we assign a number to it?
What of the benefit other PCs get?
...perhaps the issue isn't that the crafter charges a profit, but the profit is simply too large given the relative value of the feat.
What do you think?
In order to craft EVERYTHING a party will need, a caster will need MINIMUM 2 feats. (Craft Wonderous Item and Craft Magic Arms and Armour). He could easily add Craft Ring, Craft Rod, and maybe even Craft Wand.
So the question then becomes, how much is 5 feats worth? 30% wealth, maybe?
Realistically, though, most Wizards aren't going to spend 5 feats on crafting and aren't going to have the down time to craft EVERYTHING. So abstractions like this aren't very useful.
In order to craft EVERYTHING a party will need, a caster will need MINIMUM 2 feats. (Craft Wonderous Item and Craft Magic Arms and Armour). He could easily add Craft Ring, Craft Rod, and maybe even Craft Wand.
So the question then becomes, how much is 5 feats worth? 30% wealth, maybe?
Realistically, though, most Wizards aren't going to spend 5 feats on crafting and aren't going to have the down time to craft EVERYTHING. So abstractions like this aren't very useful.
Of course not. It's a complex issue. A party might not make use of rods--or only one person might out of the mix.
And what happens when other PCs start taking these feats?
In this campaign, the wizard does have time to craft everything. If or when other party members begin taking the feats, then they likely will, too. Then the issue compounds itself (if you consider it an issue).
The question "what is one feat worth" is more aimed at the folks who really do want to pin numbers on everything--and believe that this can be done. It can be done, to an extent, though never perfectly.
In "general," though, we can probably argue that one feat ISN'T worth 30 percent of wealth.
What it may be worth though, should be considered in context of the other benefits it offers. And, every crafting feat isn't created equally. ...and every crafting feat will be more and less useful depending on the campaign. And, different types of feats benefit some classes better than other ones.
...what I think this means is, "it comes down to the comfort level of your campaign, and what your players, and you, enjoy."
It has to be fun for the DM, too. A DM puts a lot of effort into a campaign, so it should flow both ways.
First off, to the OP, I'd wait to see how it plays out. If it doesn't present an issue immediately then let it be. If it starts to become a problem you can nip it in the bud. Generally speaking the caster is facing something of a loss of power already because he has crafting feats instead of meaningful ones. He probably should have something of a net increase in wealth. I suspect in the long term it won't be as large for in relative to the others as you are projecting with a single feat, and if he's investing in 5... then he's probably due some advantage in wealth to make up for the lost options.
Generally speaking he's going to hit a wall eventually as well in terms of how much useful gear he can put together if you aren't allowing him to freely stack multiple items worth of benefits together into a single item. If he does start stacking multiple items into a single item to fit his slot limitations there is an added cost associated with that which will cut into his actual benefit. While he may be worth 50% more than the others his actual net increase in power from possessions should be reduced. He's also got to make backups of spellbooks, pay for spells if he wants to acquire them from others, and so forth, which becomes more and more costly at high levels.
I think even if he starts to pull away from the others at high levels (11+) you'll have the ability to pull his wealth away from the stratospheric heights back towards near parity with the others without directly influencing his deal with the other PCs or their treasure hauls.
Alternatively, if everyone starts pulling way ahead in terms of wealth, you could implement a system like the one I have in my Saturday night game where the PCs are required to use a portion of any liquid wealth they acquire (gold and platinum found, money from magic item sales, precious art sold, quest rewards in pure money terms) towards noncombat purposes. This would allow you to hand out normal hauls of treasure, and would let them invest in non-combat aspects without undercutting their combat gear wealth per level. It's something that most of the players really like in my game, since it means we can buy fancy clothing and homes, donate to churches, fund scholarships or entire schools, and otherwise fund purely character driven things without gimping ourselves.
Finally, the longer the group is together the less comfortable the wizard may be charging the people he's fought and bled beside for services. After 9 levels the PCs in my current group wouldn't think of doing that to each other, but that's a relationship they didn't have when they first started adventuring. In short, it may work itself out without you eventually.
To Master Arminas and his Barbarian's response.
I reckon a lot of the games I have played in and run have been dysfunctional then. All I can tell you is, no player character likes being cheated out of hard-earned gold by another player character. As presented, it sounds a lot like Player X told Player Y, it costs me so-many gold to make this, so that is what you are paying me. It didn't cost him that much to make, he is jacking up the price--on a fellow party member.
There is a great deal here I find just absolutely absurd. First and foremost, the suggestion that the wizard is cheating the barbarian by offering him a 25% discount on products instead of a 50% discount. The wizard is under no obligation to work at cost. He is spending hours every day crafting items when he does so. Suggesting that the barbarian has some intrinsic right to demand the wizard do so for free is laughable.
Now if the wizard is quoting the barbarian a price that is 125% the normal price and telling him he's getting a good deal I can understand anger, and feeling cheated. At that point the wizard has lied to you purely to deceive you. That isn't the case. The barbarian is still getting a good deal here, and he's getting it because the wizard is his friend and is willing to make half the profit for the same amount of work.
I have seen characters die over similar stunts. My players, and those I play with, all know that their actions have consequences. And lying to the party, taking more than their fair share, cheating them, whatever you call it is way over the line.
Nothing described so far implies lying, and even if the wizard did just quote a number and the barbarian didn't ask around, nothing that has happened justifies the lengths the barbarian goes to in your example.
Now, Player Y could have just killed the wiz. He didn't, though because that would be wrong (and evil). He did teach him a lesson. Now if the wiz can't accept that lesson and reform his ways; if Player X comes after Y, in the groups I have been associated with, Z, A, B, C, and D will side with Y to put X down HARD.
Lets get one thing straight. What your barbarian did was both wrong and evil. He destroyed property, murdered a sentient creature, committed robbery, and assaulted someone while destroying their life's work because they didn't do hours upon hours of work for him at cost.
That is evil. That is absolutely evil, and in pretty much any group I've ever seen if the wizard limped back to everyone else with his dead familiar, no possessions, broken fingers and a broken jaw the person responsible is going to go down so hard and fast it isn't even funny.
Taking your lumps when you try to gyp the party is how we play. Getting sore and trying tokill the barbarian and trap his soul. Maybe research some spell to create a private, personalized hell for himis going WAY over the line to pure Abyssal evil. Do that because someone beat you up? Because you deserved it in the first place? No, that wiz would be put down like a rabid dog.
Because he beat him up? Your description goes way beyond beating someone up. If the barbarian slugs the wizard a couple times when he find out (nonlethal) if he assumed the wizard was working at cost that is one thing. What you described is something entirely different that has already elevated the stakes into the evil department.
In my present game I play the wizard. The wizard is very close with most of the PCs, and they've been together for years of game time. They've bled together, fought together, and endured having their souls ripped from their bodies and hurtled into Hell together to endure torment together. They have bonded beyond the normal "lets go get rich together" aspect of adventuring and regard each other as brothers and sisters. They're also trying to prevent cataclysmic apocalyptic events from happening. As a result she's (my wizard) willing to work at cost for them. They don't have any right to demand that though, and if the same players brought new PCs to the table that probably won't be the status quo, because any time I'm spending crafting is time my PC could be spending with her loved ones, or researching, or doing crafting for herself, or doing any number of things that she might want to do instead of lock herself in a lab.
Similarly, if we were in a campaign where our PCs were in more of a business arrangement I could easily see crafting being charged for. It depends on the PC arrangements.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There was a time where I thought my bard (a feat tight build, built to support the party) was going to have to give up a feat in order to be the only one in the party to get craft wonderous item. This kind of upset me because my bard is basically built on the foundation of teamwork, and no one else was going to be willing to "waste" a feat on crafting.
At that time I was willing to take the craft feat, and I was going to charge the 75% market value mark up to benefit myself as an actual "feat tax" until one other player got a craft item feat to help the party. Fortunately before it got to that two other players came around to the idea and now we have tons of crafting going on.
Moral of the story is that it only takes one other character taking the same exact craft feat to squash this.
Also, pouring a portion of the party wealth on one player doesn't really hurt if it's the right player. Certain classes (fighter) see a lot more benefit from this than others. OTOH if the wizard is rich and the fighter is in weak armor you're going to see the effect as a less than ideal distribution of wealth.
There was a time where I thought my bard (a feat tight build, built to support the party) was going to have to give up a feat in order to be the only one in the party to get craft wonderous item. This kind of upset me because my bard is basically built on the foundation of teamwork, and no one else was going to be willing to "waste" a feat on crafting.
At that time I was willing to take the craft feat, and I was going to charge the 75% market value mark up to benefit myself as an actual "feat tax" until one other player got a craft item feat to help the party. Fortunately before it got to that two other players came around to the idea and now we have tons of crafting going on.
Moral of the story is that it only takes one other character taking the same exact craft feat to squash this.
Also, pouring a portion of the party wealth on one player doesn't really hurt if it's the right player. Certain classes (fighter) see a lot more benefit from this than others. OTOH if the wizard is rich and the fighter is in weak armor you're going to see the effect as a less than ideal distribution of wealth.
This. Very much this.
Here are a few creative solutions you might try. I allow crafting in the games I run, though I've found that, over time, I end up needing to modify the rules somewhat in order to keep the playing field even.
1. You can introduce a little competition. One way of doing this would be to make the crafting feats easier to earn. For instance, allow more of them as bonus feats, or, eliminate Master Craftsman and simply assume that the fighter who invested 1 of his 2 skill points each level into a Craft skill earned it anyway.
2. Offer an alternative. Crafting can be difficult to handle. It's complex, and can quickly spiral into unintended levels of wealth. Wealth changes the game--it's intended as part of the PCs' overall CR.
What you might do is offer the PCs Ancestral Weapon feats. That is, they choose a type of item, and work with you to develop its history. Future abilities become based on the flavor of the weapon, staff, and so forth.
Since you'd be removing crafting, you'll need to sweeten the deal--I'd offer the price of an upgrade to this item at 30% off, as well as the opportunity to allow them to develop something truly custom based on their character and the story they see themselves telling.
Hey there, Mistwalker. I appreciate your concerns, and in fact, am not entirely disagreeing with you. And I think what Shifty was doing was addressing a specific argument, and attempting to reverse it. In fact, he kind of stated that was exactly what he was doing. :)
As for the rest, you're really, really putting words into my mouth. It also sounds rather confrontational, and rude. I'm not sure that's intended, though?
Part of the trouble we run into when addressing an issue like crafting is that it's highly complex. Not only is crafting highly beneficial, it can be detrimental. Drawing "a line," then, is hard and best done by speaking with the group directly.
In fact, I said that too. So where's the hostility coming from?
My apologies if my post seemed to be hostile, confrontational or rude, it wasn't meant to be. I was trying for an incredulous tone, a mix of disbelief, shock and disgust. And it wasn't only directed specifically at you, as I seem to recall saying "some of you" (meaning more than just you), or words to that effect, you just happened to be the last poster that seemed to be supporting that argument.
The OP was asking for advice if something like this was to come up in the game. He wasn't saying that it had, or that it was a problem. Most of the posts immediately seemed to be suggesting ways of nerfing or punishing the caster for choosing crafting feats and not making items for free for fellow team members.
In real life, if your friend builds houses for a living, would you expect them to spends months building you a house for cost, or would you expect (or hope for) a discount? Why would it be different in the game? Also, what are the other PCs doing during the downtime while the crafter is slaving away to make them items - relaxing, goofing off, etc?
In first post in this thread, I looked at a few broad scenarios and for most, even charging fellow PCs didn't have any real game changing effects. I also suggested that if it became a problem for various reasons, incorporate an NPC caster in town who would only charge 55% for items (they still need to have a place to leave, food, a bit of spending money, etc..). I see this as the easiest and less punishing way of dealing with the issue if it becomes a problem.
I too reversed an argument, the one Shifty had reversed. I don't think it looks attractive in either direction. It also seems to say that the other players can dictate to you what you should play, what skills and feats you should take, etc..
I wonder if those who are so agressively opposed to the idea would object if the caster refused to make items for anyone else? Their net worth would be greater than the others, as they would be able to use their cut of the loot more effectively, but there would no impression of cheating fellow player (or would there?).
The argument against charging other players boils down to:
Fighter: "I don't charge you when I use Power Attack."
Cleric: "I don't charge you when I use Selective Channeling."
Bard: "I don't charge you when I use Leadership."
Barbarian: "I don't charge you when I use Extra Rage."
Rogue: "I don't charge you when I use Improved Initiative."
etc.
1. The person really taking advantage of the PLAYER CHARACTER stamp on the forehead is the crafter. Magic items can be crafted at half value, and sold to every one in the world (except the PCs) at half value. The PCs are literally the only people the crafter can sell magic items to at a rate higher than 50%. There is an element of abuse here.
2. The design of the game offers ways to make money outside of adventuring. Skills allow for that, specifically the profession skill and the craft skill. The returns received here are modest.
3. Every character gets to choose feats, and most games run under the concept that the party is working together.
4. Most games fast forward through downtime. This means that the crafter is not actually missing out on very much. A lot of downtime actually occurs because the crafter took the feats to make magic items. The party would actually be doing something if they weren't generally waiting around for the crafter to finish up.
5. Because Crafting is one of the few (maybe only) feats that can only be used outside of combat doesn't mean that it should be used to redistribute party wealth by taxing fellow party members. All feats have value, attaching a tax to the use of this feat is arguably inflating its value in comparison to other feats. Again, fighters aren't asking to be paid a little something every time they use Power Attack.
6. There is a charge for the casting of spells listed in the core rulebook on the table for goods and services. This doesn't mean that the Cleric charges this amount every time they cast a spell. No, they cast spells on the group for free, or at least for the cost of the material component.
7. Charging 75% instead of 100% (when it only costs you 50%) is only ostensibly helping the other party members. The other party members may not realize it at the moment, but doing this is creating an overall imbalance that will be harmful to gaming groups that rely upon relative equality. So much of a character's power is based in wealth -- watching another player unexpectedly sky rocket in power in comparison to you can be disconcerting for many players. If it doesn't bother you as a player then you are in the minority, and I salute you. But whether it bothers you or not, it's now harder on me, as the GM, to balance encounters that are going to be challenging and rewarding to each member of the game.
8. It's greedy, arguably so in and out of character. Frankly, the crafter is making plenty of money adventuring with the party. In character, adventurers are already some of the richest people in the entire world. Out of character, it's done to beat the wealth by level restriction of the game.
9. Offering 'competition' in the form of an NPC undercutting rates is a slap in the face to the PC crafter. They would not have taken the crafting feat if they knew magic items would be available for significant discounts. And explaining to them that significant discounts only exist because they took the feat . . . well, it takes some of the strength out of the feat. "Great, I took a feat so that we could all get our items crafted by that guy over there. After all, it makes more sense for him to spend his downtime doing this while we're out adventuring."
10. When a character uses downtime to gather information they don't generally turn around and say, "hey, you were wasting time drinking while I was working. If you want this information you're going to have to pay me."
1. The person really taking advantage of the PLAYER CHARACTER stamp on the forehead is the crafter. Magic items can be crafted at half value, and sold to every one in the world (except the PCs) at half value. The PCs are literally the only people the crafter can sell magic items to at a rate higher than 50%. There is an element of abuse here.
This is exactly the point I was trying to make when I said that the wizard had cheated the party. Cheated is perhaps a strong word, but he definately took advantage of them for his own gain. Perhaps my example (which was originally intended as humorous, I remind you again) was flawed, but I would still believe that any crafter treating the party in such a fashion would quickly wind up an ex-party member or dead.
Master Arminas
Here's my concern: at some point it's almost like I'm purposefully blocking the PC crafter from making gains, and worse, the PC crafter is bound to throw his hands in the air, and say, "why did I even take this feat if everyone is giving us cost breaks anyway!"
I am with you, even though it was my advice.
The thing is though that I wouldn't have an issue with the player charging the other player 75% in the first place. It just means both of them have some more cash than they would have before the sale (both the buyer and seller are getting an advantage over just buying items).
As GM I would keep track of the total party wealth but I wouldn't involve myself in how they distribute it between themselves.
Some groups like to just give items they find to who ever can benefit from it the most (and therefor help the group), but this invariably means that one person is ending up with more stuff than the others (typically the tank type guy). That's ok. If that is how they want to split things up it is their call... just keep the overall balance in play.
Likewise, some groups want to make sure everything is fair down to the copper piece. Also ok... it's their call.
Sean Mahoney
So I am curious of two situations then. Would you guys who are opposed to this also have a problem with:
1) A character taking a feat that doesn't really help out the party. Maybe the rogue took Skill Focus (Profession: Chef). Is this wasting party resources because he didn't take something that benefited everyone?
2) Would the wizard still be a jerk if he said, "Sorry, I don't have time to craft that for you Barbarian, I am busy crafting stuff for myself?" That is to say if the PC only crafted for himself and just didn't offer the service to other players. He is still making the group more effective as his character is more effective and that helps the group (just like the Barbarian who took power attack is helping the group by being more effective himself in combat).
Sean Mahoney
So I am curious of two situations then. Would you guys who are opposed to this also have a problem with:
1) A character taking a feat that doesn't really help out the party. Maybe the rogue took Skill Focus (Profession: Chef). Is this wasting party resources because he didn't take something that benefited everyone?
2) Would the wizard still be a jerk if he said, "Sorry, I don't have time to craft that for you Barbarian, I am busy crafting stuff for myself?" That is to say if the PC only crafted for himself and just didn't offer the service to other players. He is still making the group more effective as his character is more effective and that helps the group (just like the Barbarian who took power attack is helping the group by being more effective himself in combat).
Sean Mahoney
1. Not a problem, but you can bet the rogue would be cooking dinner each and every night for the party. Of course, he might have problems getting the barbarian to eat pastries if Bar-Bar is expecting steak. LOl And in my groups, would probably gain a new nickname: Cooky, or Chef, or something similar. Heck, we'd probably shell out our own money to buy him a fifty-two piece set of adamantine cutlery!
2. "No problem, wiz-o. Make your own stuff, man." Two weeks later, in a big fight, barbarian fighting the BBEG is the closest character to the wizard, who has just been mobbed by small constructs immune to magic. "Help me out here, Bar-bar!" "Well, my hands are kind of full with this guy at the moment, wiz-o. Maybe if I had that iten you were too busy to make a few weeks back I might have been able to help you out."
And once again, example 2 is taking it to an extreme. But characters who don't show teamwork, shouldn't expect to receive teamwork.
At least in my opinion.
Master Arminas
2. "No problem, wiz-o. Make your own stuff, man." Two weeks later, in a big fight, barbarian fighting the BBEG is the closest character to the wizard, who has just been mobbed by small constructs immune to magic. "Help me out here, Bar-bar!" "Well, my hands are kind of full with this guy at the moment, wiz-o. Maybe if I had that iten you were too busy to make a few weeks back I might have been able to help you out."
And once again, example 2 is taking it to an extreme. But characters who don't show teamwork, shouldn't expect to receive teamwork.
I am not sure that is so much extreme as not the same situation at all. The wizard isn't saying he won't help that barbarian in a fight... heck he could have just spent all his time crafting scrolls of Enlarge Person, Haste, and other buffs that help the Barbarian tremendously. He just isn't dropping the things that make him do his role in the party better for things that buff that one character who didn't take the feat.
I am not understanding the attitude that the barbarian has to pull his weight in a fight and do his thing and that is good enough but the wizard must do the same AND give up his time and resources (feats) to the barbarian.
Sean Mahoney
The argument against charging other players boils down to:
Fighter: "I don't charge you when I use Power Attack."
Cleric: "I don't charge you when I use Selective Channeling."
Bard: "I don't charge you when I use Leadership."
Barbarian: "I don't charge you when I use Extra Rage."
Rogue: "I don't charge you when I use Improved Initiative."
etc.
You forgot the Crafter: "I don't charge you when I use Improved Initiative or Empower or Quicken."
I don't see the merit of this argument.1. The person really taking advantage of the PLAYER CHARACTER stamp on the forehead is the crafter.
If the crafter is only using their wealth to optimize themselves with non-consumable gear, then I would be more inclined to agree with you. I object when this is applied to everyone.
4. Most games fast forward through downtime. This means that the crafter is not actually missing out on very much. A lot of downtime actually occurs because the crafter took the feats to make magic items. The party would actually be doing something if they weren't generally waiting around for the crafter to finish up.
Waiting for the crafter to finish gear for themselves or for the group? Even if the game fast forwards though the downtime, it breaks immersion for me to have one PC work feverishly (well, maybe not, but you get the idea) while the rest of the group is relaxing and enjoying the downtime.
5. Because Crafting is one of the few (maybe only) feats that can only be used outside of combat doesn't mean that it should be used to redistribute party wealth by taxing fellow party members. All feats have value, attaching a tax to the use of this feat is arguably inflating its value in comparison to other feats. Again, fighters aren't asking to be paid a little something every time they use Power Attack.
Nor is the crafter asking for a little something every time they use a feat in combat. I still don't see the merit of this argument.
7. Charging 75% instead of 100% (when it only costs you 50%) is only ostensibly helping the other party members. The other party members may not realize it at the moment, but doing this is creating an overall imbalance that will be harmful to gaming groups that rely upon relative equality. So much of a character's power is based in wealth -- watching another player unexpectedly sky rocket in power in comparison to you can be disconcerting for many players. If it doesn't bother you as a player then you are in the minority, and I salute you. But whether it bothers you or not, it's now harder on me, as the GM, to balance encounters that are going to be challenging and rewarding to each member of the game.
As Sean mentioned above, some groups distribute treasure based on who can most effectively use the items, or who has the biggest need for them. Often, this means that one PC has 60-75% of the group wealth.
How weath is distribute varies per group and as such, your argument 7 holds less weight, depending on the group.8. It's greedy, arguably so in and out of character. Frankly, the crafter is making plenty of money adventuring with the party. In character, adventurers are already some of the richest people in the entire world. Out of character, it's done to beat the wealth by level restriction of the game.
Again, this is applying a very broad negative brush stroke to everyone (tar and fethering), saying that if you charge more than 50% for magic creation, then you are greedy. I object very strongly to that.
Some groups have a group pool to purchase expendable, like wand of cure light wounds (CLW). Not all groups do this.
So, you are saying that if the crafter charges extra to make magic items and uses the extra wealth to make a few wands of CLW, Lesser Restoration, etc... they are greedy?
Or if they make a staff with Communal Mount, Communal XXX spell, they are being greedy?
9. Offering 'competition' in the form of an NPC undercutting rates is a slap in the face to the PC crafter. They would not have taken the crafting feat if they knew magic items would be available for significant discounts. And explaining to them that significant discounts only exist because they took the feat . . . well, it takes some of the strength out of the feat. "Great, I took a feat so that we could all get our items crafted by that guy over there. After all, it makes more sense for him to spend his downtime doing this while we're out adventuring."
Please note that I suggest this as a solution if the PC was being greedy and/or the wealth distribution was starting to cause problems. This was not suggested as a default setting, nor do I believe that it should happen unless the player is unwilling to adopt a reasonalble approach and that there is a problem.
If the crafter is making items for their familiar, companion, etc.. so that there is a bigger chance of survival in any encounter, or even to allow the familiar/companion to better make use of wands of CLWs (or lesser restoration or invisibility or etc) to help the group, I don't see how this would be a problem for the group.
Also, I am curious to what you would say to a crafter that only crafted for themselves. They are not taking any gold from other PCs, but eventually, they will be ahead in wealth.
I am not understanding the attitude that the barbarian has to pull his weight in a fight and do his thing and that is good enough but the wizard must do the same AND give up his time and resources (feats) to the barbarian.
I too am having a problem with this.
The argument against charging other players boils down to:
Fighter: "I don't charge you when I use Power Attack."
Cleric: "I don't charge you when I use Selective Channeling."
Bard: "I don't charge you when I use Leadership."
Barbarian: "I don't charge you when I use Extra Rage."
Rogue: "I don't charge you when I use Improved Initiative."
etc.
Right, and the wizard doesn't charge the party when he hastes them, or when he quickens spells on adventures, or when he empowers spells. This has nothing to do with actions taken while adventuring. Crafting goes way beyond working together while on an adventure. This entire example is superfluous.
1. The person really taking advantage of the PLAYER CHARACTER stamp on the forehead is the crafter. Magic items can be crafted at half value, and sold to every one in the world (except the PCs) at half value. The PCs are literally the only people the crafter can sell magic items to at a rate higher than 50%. There is an element of abuse here.
Except you are discounting that the PCs are still getting a benefit. If the crafter is spending months of his life doing magic item crafting he should reap some reward.
2. The design of the game offers ways to make money outside of adventuring. Skills allow for that, specifically the profession skill and the craft skill. The returns received here are modest.
Yes.... I'm not sure what this is getting at, unless it is continuing your earlier train of thought.
3. Every character gets to choose feats, and most games run under the concept that the party is working together.
Right, but working together on adventures and spending months of your life in a lab working on magic items for someone else for free are entirely different. This is more akin to asking the rogue to take over the thieves guide for the wizard out of the goodness of his heart, or the fighter to go fight a war for him.
4. Most games fast forward through downtime. This means that the crafter is not actually missing out on very much. A lot of downtime actually occurs because the crafter took the feats to make magic items. The party would actually be doing something if they weren't generally waiting around for the crafter to finish up.
Not... really true at all in my experience. Most of the time the non-crafters have their own goals and desires in life, be it visiting loved ones, romancing people, starting businesses, building strongholds, chasing down leads for new adventurers, or just relaxing after facing death.
5. Because Crafting is one of the few (maybe only) feats that can only be used outside of combat doesn't mean that it should be used to redistribute party wealth by taxing fellow party members. All feats have value, attaching a tax to the use of this feat is arguably inflating its value in comparison to other feats. Again, fighters aren't asking to be paid a little something every time they use Power Attack.
The caster isn't taxing anyone. He's offering a service. If you want cheaper magic items you can have me do the crafting for you. There is nothing requiring the other players to take the wizard up on his offer.
And again, stop comparing crafting to using power attack. One is an action that takes a moment in the course of an adventure in which everyone is fighting towards a common goal. The other requires weeks and months of downtime and requires one person locking themselves in a lab to make nice things for the others. Your comparison is like saying "I shopping with you so you have to do all the cooking and cleaning for us for the next six weeks".
6. The is a charge for the casting of spells listed in the core rulebook on the table for goods and services. This doesn't mean that the Cleric charges this amount every time they cast a spell. No, they cast spells on the group for free, or at least for the cost of the material component.
Just as the wizard probably casts spells for free. But again, crafting items is a whole different magnitude of commitment. In most cases you are comparing a standard action or a couple minutes with weeks and months.
7. Charging 75% instead of 100% (when it only costs you 50%) is only ostensibly helping the other party members. The other party members may not realize it at the moment, but doing this is creating an overall imbalance that will be harmful to gaming groups that rely upon relative equality. So much of a character's power is based in wealth -- watching another player unexpectedly sky rocket in power in comparison to you can be disconcerting for many players. If it doesn't bother you as a player then you are in the minority, and I salute you. But whether it bothers you or not, it's now harder on me, as the GM, to balance encounters that are going to be challenging and rewarding to each member of the game.
You are making an assumption here that the wizard's power is going to skyrocket. I've already outlined above how this probably won't become a real issue, and how the DM can easily manage it without bludgeoning the PCs if it starts to become an issue.
8. It's greedy, arguably so in and out of character. Frankly, the crafter is making plenty of money adventuring with the party. In character, adventurers are already some of the richest people in the entire world. Out of character, it's done to beat the wealth by level restriction of the game.
First of all, you have no idea if it is out of character. You have no details about the character relationships in question, and you are going way out on a limb here with your assumption. Second, telling someone they make enough money and should do something for you is never going to go over well. "Say Bill, you have this business that is making lots of money, so I feel you should build my house at cost. I know you could do other things in that time, and I know you'll have to spend that time away from your family, but really you owe me, after all when we all got in that bar fight last week I was there to fight with you." Good luck with that.
Third, I find the argument that this is purely done for OOC reasons like cheating the wealth to be laughable. I can think of plenty of IC reasons why I might charge you something for my time.
9. Offering 'competition' in the form of an NPC undercutting rates is a slap in the face to the PC crafter. They would not have taken the crafting feat if they knew magic items would be available for significant discounts. And explaining to them that significant discounts only exist because they took the feat . . . well, it takes some of the strength out of the feat. "Great, I took a feat so that we could all get our items crafted by that guy over there. After all, it makes more sense for him to spend his downtime doing this while we're out adventuring."
How is this a slap in the face? He is getting what he wanted out of it - lower item prices.
10. When a character uses downtime to gather information they don't generally turn around and say, "hey, you were wasting time drinking while I was working. If you want this information you're going to have to pay me."
Again, you don't generally spend months of your life gathering information. Further, acquiring quest leads generates quests that you want to go on together. Crafting items is a whole different ball game.
In short, I disagree with all ten of your points.
So I am curious of two situations then. Would you guys who are opposed to this also have a problem with:
1) A character taking a feat that doesn't really help out the party. Maybe the rogue took Skill Focus (Profession: Chef). Is this wasting party resources because he didn't take something that benefited everyone?
2) Would the wizard still be a jerk if he said, "Sorry, I don't have time to craft that for you Barbarian, I am busy crafting stuff for myself?" That is to say if the PC only crafted for himself and just didn't offer the service to other players. He is still making the group more effective as his character is more effective and that helps the group (just like the Barbarian who took power attack is helping the group by being more effective himself in combat).
Sean Mahoney
Some Quick Answers: I reserve the right to change them after thinking about it more.
1. No. My concern deals more with balance issues created when the wealth by level system is violated; the CR system is inevitably compromised.
So, if the chef started charging exorbitant prices, then yes, I would worry.
2. It is the crafter's choice who to make items for. In the end, I think it will likely be beneficial for the crafter to make items for other party members, but if they don't, then they've received ample reward just doing it for themselves.
See, the crafter can only make as many items as the crafter has coins to do so.
Some Quick Answers: I reserve the right to change them after thinking about it more.
Of course! I would think less of anyone who wasn't willing to change their mind after more thought if they came to a different conclusion. This is a discussion, not a well thought out position paper... we are all just talking through this.
1. No. My concern deals more with balance issues created when the wealth by level system is violated; the CR system is inevitably compromised.
So, if the chef started charging exorbitant prices, then yes, I would worry.
The CR system was why I included the Chef example. That character has spent a feat on something that does not contribute to the party with that characters role in combat. If this happens enough then the party as a whole may not be as competitive against a CR that they reasonably should be.
Now, I am NOT advocating it is wrong, just that people CAN make choice for their character that aren't all about making the party better. They aren't always the optimal choices and that should be ok.
Likewise, if the wizard in the party is not doing everything he can with every ounce of his time to make the party better, he probably shouldn't fear the rest of his party breaking into his home and pooping on his pillow.
2. It is the crafter's choice who to make items for. In the end, I think it will likely be beneficial for the crafter to make items for other party members, but if they don't, then they've received ample reward just doing it for themselves.
See, the crafter can only make as many items as the crafter has coins to do so.
Agreed.
I guess I see the 75% thing as a good way to this end though. The Barbarian would normally pay 100% for that item. The Wizard just offered him a way to either A) get that item sooner when he couldn't normally afford it and/or B) have left over cash so he can get more things that make him better.
In return the wizard gives up time he could be crafting things for himself, but gets more money that he can put to items that help himself (and thus the party).
The wealth never leaves the party, anyone it applies to is helping the party (right?). So why does this hurt the barbarian (especially enough to break the wizards fingers and jaw)? Seems like a Win/Win to me.
Sean Mahoney
I guess we don't look at it that way FD.
If he blew all his feats on crafting then he isn't pulling his full weight in the dungeon and the party is left to pick up the slack of an underperformer. On the other hand that can be done easier with the stuff he makes.
Cimply put, one way or another you are adding ustility to the party.
The wizard that puts his effort into killing stuff instead of making stuff is being penalised significantly (under your considerations) as he only gets an equal cut, not an inequal cut craftywizzy is now obtaining.
If you want to craft and make stuff then tahts awesome, but to then be subpar during 'business hours' and expect your normal cut and THEN charge extra to the people who carried you is just too much.
Looks to me like the crafter is being a buddy and selling his stuff at a big discount. I know as a store owner that I can't stand friends that expect stuff from my store with no markup. I'm in business to make money. I think it is quite generous of the crafter to give the huge discount to a fellow player.
Mistwalker, it's difficult to respond to you and Peter at the same time. I've tried to make sure some of my responses to Peter below are relevant as responses to you as well, but if I have missed any of your points it was an oversight, and not intentional. Please let me know.
Right, and the wizard doesn't charge the party when he hastes them, or when he quickens spells on adventures, or when he empowers spells. This has nothing to do with actions taken while adventuring. Crafting goes way beyond working together while on an adventure. This entire example is superfluous.
Simply put, I disagree.
One feat is as valuable as any other feat to the party. Let me phrase this another way: the other party members don't charge you for any of the resulting benefits of feats they use; there's no reason for you to charge them because your feat takes a long time to use.
Crafting is entirely about working well together while on an adventure. It's prep work for adventures to come.
Except you are discounting that the PCs are still getting a benefit. If the crafter is spending months of his life doing magic item crafting he should reap some reward.
He is reaping some reward. It's called party treasure.
When the crafter does this he is abusing the system by meta determining who he can sell items to at inflated prices, i.e. the PCs.
Let me refer you to page 140 of the Core Rulebook. Therein, it says:
It's arguable to begin with whether a GM should let players purchase from players at rates higher than this, but since PCs are PCs there is a general understanding that they can toss their coins wherever they want.
But that doesn't mean that the crafter is not violating the "selling treasure" rule on page 140. The PCs are not running stores, they are engaging in a group adventuring career.
Yes.... I'm not sure what this is getting at, unless it is continuing your earlier train of thought.
I am pointing out two things here.
1. These are the ways you can make money outside of adventuring by the design of the game. These are not just some of the ways. They are the ways. Crafting Magic Items: guess what? Not one of the ways.
2. The returns offered here are modest. The design of the game gives us a ballpark of how much money characters should be able to make outside of adventuring. Selling magic items to player characters for extra coins establishes a return far beyond the amount allocated for such activities by the design of the game.
Right, but working together on adventures and spending months of your life in a lab working on magic items for someone else for free are entirely different. This is more akin to asking the rogue to take over the thieves guide for the wizard out of the goodness of his heart, or the fighter to go fight a war for him.
The idea that the work is "for free" ignores the benefit received during adventures.
Using fluff to elevate the status of a feat beyond other feats is specious. What you're refusing to acknowledge here is the mechanic of the system -- you are actively turning your cheek on balance issues, as well as blatantly ignoring the rewards that come from crafting the items.
This argument would have far more merit if you were making items for someone you would never see again, for someone who would not aid you in destroying the lich lord of wherever, and further help you loot the lair. In other words, you're helping yourself already; by charging extra for your time you're helping yourself twice.
Not... really true at all in my experience. Most of the time the non-crafters have their own goals and desires in life, be it visiting loved ones, romancing people, starting businesses, building strongholds, chasing down leads for new adventurers, or just relaxing after facing death.
You don't painstakingly go through each of these moments. You tell the players such and such happens, and you might run a few roleplaying scenes. If you do more than that, then you're still probably working on the first few years of downtime you've come across.
I don't see why a crafter can't have a romance while crafting. I don't see why they can't throw funds toward the building of a stronghold, even if they're not hammering and nailing themselves.
I don't see your point at all.
Bottom line: the crafter isn't really missing out on anything. And the crafter is choosing to craft whatever he or she is working on, and probably for a good reason; specifically, because crafting the item in question is going to be beneficial down the line during actual adventures.
The caster isn't taxing anyone. He's offering a service. If you want cheaper magic items you can have me do the crafting for you. There is nothing requiring the other players to take the wizard up on his offer.
The rules establish the crafter's ability to charge 50% of the value of the item crafted. Demanding more than that is a burdensome charge, and a tax by definition. But I don't want to get into an argument of semantics.
The point is players offer one another services all the time. It's par for the course. Their payment for offering those services is in successfully surviving to claim the treasure at the end of the day.
The idea that it takes you "months" (the time frame depends on the value of the object, not everything takes "months") doesn't make it of a service than all the services you're receiving under the same social (party) compact.
And again, stop comparing crafting to using power attack. One is an action that takes a moment in the course of an adventure in which everyone is fighting towards a common goal. The other requires weeks and months of downtime and requires one person locking themselves in a lab to make nice things for the others. Your comparison is like saying "I shopping with you so you have to do all the cooking and cleaning for us for the next six weeks".
What are you crafting for if not a common goal?
Again, whatever the feat or class ability: you are all trading services for the future gains of treasure. Asking for more money on top of that because one of your feats happens to take longer than other feats is poor thinking at best, and avarice at worst.
Just as the wizard probably casts spells for free. But again, crafting items is a whole different magnitude of commitment. In most cases you are comparing a standard action or a couple minutes with weeks and months.
Another way to say that is that I am comparing a service to a service.
I think that you are over valuing your service here because of the time it takes you. You are neglecting to notice the end reward of treasure, and trying to shake down other party members by offering them a supposedly good deal.
This is happening for one of two reasons:
1. You don't know any better because you're stuck in a self-righteous moment.
2. You are actively trying to get paid twice and hoping everyone else is too stupid to realize it.
You are making an assumption here that the wizard's power is going to skyrocket. I've already outlined above how this probably won't become a real issue, and how the DM can easily manage it without bludgeoning the PCs if it starts to become an issue.
If you are incapable of noticing or acknowledging the potential for the crafter's power to skyrocket then I don't know what to tell you. If anyone has outlined the potential danger there, I have.
As far as your solution to curtail the problem if it arises, well, I haven't seen an effective solution mentioned by you.
The fact is, it can create balance issues. The fact is, it can get high powered items in the game earlier. The fact is, challenges are tied directly into the wealth of the party. The fact is, one party member with a lot more gear is going to be more powerful, and is going to hamper the enjoyment of a great deal of players. Whether your players would be hampered by that or not is moot to the issue.
First of all, you have no idea if it is out of character. You have no details about the character relationships in question, and you are going way out on a limb here with your assumption. Second, telling someone they make enough money and should do something for you is never going to go over well. "Say Bill, you have this business that is making lots of money, so I feel you should build my house at cost. I know you could do other things in that time, and I know you'll have to spend that time away from your family, but really you owe me, after all when we all got in that bar fight last week I was there to fight with you." Good luck with that.
I don't know where to start here.
1. I know there is out of character motivation because the player knows they can't sell their items to anyone else. That is a meta decision. "Hmmm. So, I can't sell my items for profit over there, I know, I'll sell them to the other PCs." That is out of character thinking.
2. As an adventuring party the characters are pretty much equal members in a business -- the business of adventuring, and the treasure is their profit.
3. The characters don't just help each other out in bar fights. They fight dragons and whatnot.
Third, I find the argument that this is purely done for OOC reasons like cheating the wealth to be laughable. I can think of plenty of IC reasons why I might charge you something for my time.
I didn't say it was done purely for out of character reasons. I said that out of character greed has an impact on the choice to do it.
I'm confident that in character reasons exist to do it. Heck, I mentioned one. Greed, and the desire to get paid twice for the same service.
How is this a slap in the face? He is getting what he wanted out of it - lower item prices.
It's a slap in the face because:
1. If there were going to be discounts in the game then the player wouldn't have taken the crafting feat -- he or she would have taken a different feat, and
2. If there are only discounts because he or she took the feat then he or she has less incentive to use the feat because it's easier to get the NPC to do it while the PCs are adventuring. This means the player has less reason to justify spending downtime crafting to enjoy the flavor of making their own items.
3. Everyone gets the feat for free except the PC who actually took it. While I don't think the crafter should make items at marked up rates, I do think that the crafter should make whatever they want to make.
Again, you don't generally spend months of your life gathering information. Further, acquiring quest leads generates quests that you want to go on together. Crafting items is a whole different ball game.
It's only a different ball game because of your specious logic. You avoid the real pay off of using the feat, and you lean heavily on the crutch of downtime to make your points.
In short, it's a service being traded for other services -- the payment of which is the treasure achieved while using the items.
In short, I disagree with all ten of your points.
In short, I don't find you commentary compelling.
***
A final note here:
I don't think a PC should ever have to create an item for another PC. A fighter gets to decide when he or she uses Power Attack. A crafter should be able to decide when he or she uses Craft Whatever Item.
That being said, there are times when it will be beneficial to use feats, and there are times when it will probably be beneficial to craft items for other PCs. But that doesn't make it mandatory, just smart.
I think someone mentioned that the crafter's gold piece value in magic items would be higher even if they didn't craft items for other party members. Yes, that is true. But if you look at the numbers you will find that the difference isn't as extreme. I believe that marginal separation exists as a boon to the PC, and it isn't enough to create crazy levels of disparity.
1. The person really taking advantage of the PLAYER CHARACTER stamp on the forehead is the crafter. Magic items can be crafted at half value, and sold to every one in the world (except the PCs) at half value.
The SRD has this to say:
"Price: This is the cost, in gold pieces, to purchase the item, if it is available for sale. Generally speaking, magic items can be sold by PCs for half this value."
Thus in the general case, you sell items (not just magic items either, anything but trade goods) for 50% value - presumably a quick sale to a merchant who will go and sell it (eventually) at 100% value. Since it's a merchant's job to make a profit, he's not going to buy it at the price he could sell it at. Your average NPC will buy said magic items from the merchant at that 100% rate as well.
Players can try to sell their loot for 100% value, but it finding a customer won't be easy - as PCs are generally the only ones that NEED that kind of equipment. And of course trying to sell everything the party acquires for 100% value will bog your game to a crawl, just like PCs prying up everything from a dungeon and dragging it back to town (with several trips) will also do. That's sort of why the 50% 'rule of thumb' is there in the first place.
|
This is a simple problem masquerading itself as a complex one. Let's assume you believe item creation in itself is balanced. The problem for you is the transaction among players. Before I tell you why, the answer is that it's not a problem. Here's why.
For a group with an item crafter, crafting an item for half price is equivalent to a group without an item crafter purchasing the item at full price. A comparable situation then would be as follows, and works for a group with or without an item crafter:
Party obtains item for an acceptable price, balance-wise. Player A gives Player B a sum of gold.
Is that unbalanced? The only thing of question is that one player gave another player what could be considered a gift in the form of gold.
Mistwalker, it's difficult to respond to you and Peter at the same time. I've tried to make sure some of my responses to Peter below are relevant as responses to you as well, but if I have missed any of your points it was an oversight, and not intentional. Please let me know.
I would like to point out that from what I understand of the RAI of selling for 50%, it was to stop a crafter from being able to obtain obscene wealth - making an item, selling it, making two selling them, making four, selling them, etc... It was not put in place to control how PCs sell or exchange services between themselves.
There were a few points that I would appreciate having your thoughts on, so I cut and pasted them (and expanded one or two a bit).
As Sean mentioned above, some groups distribute treasure based on who can most effectively use the items, or who has the biggest need for them. Often, this means that one PC has 60-75% of the group wealth. Does this mean that that PC should be punished somehow, because they have skyrocketed past the wealth of the others?
Again, this is applying a very broad negative brush stroke to everyone (tar and feathering), saying that if you charge more than 50% for magic creation, then you are greedy. I object very strongly to that.
Some groups have a group pool to purchase expendable, like wand of cure light wounds (CLW). Not all groups do this.
So, you are saying that if the crafter charges extra to make magic items and uses the extra wealth to make a few wands of CLW, Lesser Restoration, etc... they are greedy?
Or if they make a staff with Communal Mount, Communal XXX spell, they are being greedy?
NPC Crafter suggestion. Please note that I suggest this as a solution if the PC was being greedy and/or the wealth distribution was starting to cause problems. This was not suggested as a default setting, nor do I believe that it should happen unless the player is unwilling to adopt a reasonalble approach and that there is a problem.
If the crafter is making items for their familiar, companion, etc.. so that there is a bigger chance of survival in any encounter, or even to allow the familiar/companion to better make use of wands of CLWs (or lesser restoration or invisibility or etc) to help the group, I don't see how this would be a problem for the group or how the wealth of the crafter would be considered skyrocketed past the others. Also, this would agree with your goal of helping the group.
Also, I am curious to what you would say to a crafter that only crafted for themselves. They are not taking any gold from other PCs, but eventually, they will be ahead in wealth - they will have twice as much wealth as the others in the group.
Additional questions/comments
You are saying that services, regardless of the time taken are of equivalent value. I have a problem with this. Because it only takes you, the player a few moments to go through months of downtime, doesn't mean that it would have the same effect to the PC. I consider that metagaming.
You seem to be spending a lot of time saying that the only reason a crafter would charge more is because they are greedy, both the player and the PC. Why is that? I have suggested a few reasons why that would not be the case, but I am not sure if you missed them or disregarded them because they may refute your argument.
Looks to me like the crafter is being a buddy and selling his stuff at a big discount. I know as a store owner that I can't stand friends that expect stuff from my store with no markup. I'm in business to make money. I think it is quite generous of the crafter to give the huge discount to a fellow player.
Thats because you are a Store Owner, and not an adventurer.
Adventurers are supposed to make money by adventuring.
If a player wants to take item creation feats as an adventuring party member then they are doing so on the proviso they are supplying the party with 'for cost gear'. He is brionging to the party his skills as a craftsman. Thats his job in the party... thats why he gets his share of the loot.
On the other hand, if he wants to play Craftsman with a shop, the party might be his friends from poker night on Fridays, but when he's running his shop they are out adventuring without him.
The Craftsman isn't a shop owner.
The Craftsman is a role the player is filling out in the Party.
Imagine the Army sent out its craftsmen soldiers and they came back and presented the Officers with an invoice for installing a toilet... thats what is being presented here. They get their PAY.
MW: no worries. Just wanted to see where things were. This is a debate that tends to raise some blood pressure.
To the OP: What were your thoughts on the legacy item concept?
If a player wants to take item creation feats as an adventuring party member then they are doing so on the proviso they are supplying the party with 'for cost gear'. He is brionging to the party his skills as a craftsman. Thats his job in the party... thats why he gets his share of the loot.
Reference please?
I do not recall ever reading this in any of the books, in any of the editions.
MW: no worries. Just wanted to see where things were. This is a debate that tends to raise some blood pressure.
It can be challenging to convey one's tone by the written word. :)
I lurk more than I post, but this thread seems to have drawn me out.
I think this thread is going somewhat into the category of general discussion, but that's probably alright considering the barbarian thread here in the advice forum, :), so I'll keep going.
I would like to point out that from what I understand of the RAI of selling for 50%, it was to stop a crafter from being able to obtain obscene wealth - making an item, selling it, making two selling them, making four, selling them, etc... It was not put in place to control how PCs sell or exchange services between themselves.
My position is that the caster is attaining obscene wealth through the above cost sale of magic items to party members.
There were a few points that I would appreciate having your thoughts on, so I cut and pasted them (and expanded one or two a bit).
I will gladly offer my thoughts here.
As Sean mentioned above, some groups distribute treasure based on who can most effectively use the items, or who has the biggest need for them. Often, this means that one PC has 60-75% of the group wealth. Does this mean that that PC should be punished somehow, because they have skyrocketed past the wealth of the others?
To start, I don't advocate punishing PCs at all. I'm sorry if that is the impression that I've given. I want to make sure the game is enjoyable for everyone, and when I see a potential dichotomy of wealth I worry that problems may be forthcoming.
I think it's an exception to the rule when parties decide to concentrate their wealth on a single character. It obviously creates an imbalance in individual wealth, but the players are very aware of what they are doing. That tells me that the players are not going to have hurt feelings, or jealousy issues when they notice that the item laden member of the group is getting more overall glory in combat scenes.
In my experience, which I consider relatively educated, most players do not enjoy playing in a game alongside someone else who has more power. The lower powered party members tend to act out, and rock the gaming boat.
Also in my experience, it is more difficult to run challenging scenes for players of disparate power levels. The fight will either be too easy for the person with all the gear, or too hard for the folks without enough gear, causing an unnecessary risk of PC death.
Players are allowed to split their wealth however they want. I've just never been convinced that doing so unevenly is a good idea.
Again, this is applying a very broad negative brush stroke to everyone (tar and feathering), saying that if you charge more than 50% for magic creation, then you are greedy. I object very strongly to that.
I view the party treasure as the reward for actions that strengthen the party. I think asking for more than an equal share of the party treasure is, by nature and definition, greedy.
I'm using this word to paint it clearly for folks who might think that the crafter is doing them a solid. It's a matter of perspective, and when you start to see it as it is - being paid twice - then you start to realize just how poor it is as a form of behavior.
Granted, it's not necessarily greedy if the crafter gets the extra gold and gives it all away to charity, but I don't think that's the most likely end result.
Some groups have a group pool to purchase expendable, like wand of cure light wounds (CLW). Not all groups do this.
So, you are saying that if the crafter charges extra to make magic items and uses the extra wealth to make a few wands of CLW, Lesser Restoration, etc... they are greedy?
Or if they make a staff with Communal Mount, Communal XXX spell, they are being greedy?
I think that parties should decide what they collectively combine their funds for.
This example seems to highlight the crafter as a governing body. It is like when the government takes taxes from you to fund a public school for your child to go to. They take your money, then they decide how to use it best for your benefit.
Well, the crafter isn't the governor. He or she doesn't need to take your money to use it on something you need for you. You can do that yourself. And if the crafter is doing it under the pretense of selling you a magic item, well, the crafter is really just trying to take control of how your money is spent for your benefit. It's somewhat insulting.
NPC Crafter suggestion. Please note that I suggest this as a solution if the PC was being greedy and/or the wealth distribution was starting to cause problems. This was not suggested as a default setting, nor do I believe that it should happen unless the player is unwilling to adopt a reasonalble approach and that there is a problem.
I get why this suggestion was made, and where it's coming from. I just think that it unduly harms the crafter, and I don't really like the idea of punishing players as a solution; I greatly prefer stopping the problems before they develop as opposed to after.
If the crafter is making items for their familiar, companion, etc.. so that there is a bigger chance of survival in any encounter, or even to allow the familiar/companion to better make use of wands of CLWs (or lesser restoration or invisibility or etc) to help the group, I don't see how this would be a problem for the group or how the wealth of the crafter would be considered skyrocketed past the others. Also, this would agree with your goal of helping the group.
The thing is, we're talking about hundreds of thousands of gold pieces in different levels of wealth. We're not talking about just enough to outfit a cohort, or a familiar. Hundreds of thousands, maybe over a million if there are enough party members in the scenario.
I think that an even distribution of that wealth tends to promote smoother, more successful games.
In real life our economy is not a zero sum game. I don't believe in a redistribution of wealth in real life. Gaming is a different story. There is only so much wealth going around; it is a zero sum game. One man's rise does, in gaming mechanic, dictate another man's fall. In other words, because you have more money, I have less. Selling items at 75% only provides the illusion that that is not true.
Also, I am curious to what you would say to a crafter that only crafted for themselves. They are not taking any gold from other PCs, but eventually, they will be ahead in wealth - they will have twice as much wealth as the others in the group.
I am perfectly fine with a caster that only crafts for themselves. I don't think it's the most effective use of their feat, but it is their choice. A fighter can decide when to use Power Attack. A crafter should be able to decide when to use Craft Magical Arms and Armor.
But it doesn't mean that they will have twice as much wealth. You have to remember that the other players will have a multitude of items that they found as treasure, and that treasure is represented as having half value items, just like items crafted.
So, the gap isn't as magnificently wide.
Additional questions/comments
You are saying that services, regardless of the time taken are of equivalent value. I have a problem with this. Because it only takes you, the player a few moments to go through months of downtime, doesn't mean that it would have the same effect to the PC. I consider that metagaming.
I'm saying that the payment for services is received via party treasure. Trying to quantify services to the group beyond that is impossible, and arbitrary at best.
First, we have to assume a relative balance exists in Pathfinder, and that forces us to accept that a relative balance exists in the feats within the system. You can take this feat, for example, or you can take that one. They are equal, at least in terms of being able to select them. The financial reward for taking them should be comparable. The effectiveness of taking them is another story -- the reward for effectiveness is survivability.
How do you quantify the value of the guy who always gets hurt when compared to the value of someone that always comes out unscathed? The one that gets hurt a lot surely goes through more agony, but that doesn't mean they get a higher share of the treasure.
You seem to be spending a lot of time saying that the only reason a crafter would charge more is because they are greedy, both the player and the PC. Why is that?
PC: charging more than base cost is a way to make more money than the already significant level of treasure being received for doing business with your respective party members. Trying to get that extra gold is greedy by definition. It is "wishing to possess more than one needs or deserves."
It's more than one needs because the PCs are already wealthy by all the standards of society, and it is more than one deserves because the point of making the item is to further the survivability of the party to attain even more wealth via treasure rewards.
PLAYER: the player knows the mechanic of the game. The player knows that a wealth by level chart exists. At least, the vast majority of players know this. This is one of the few ways to violate that chart, and it is exceptionally hard for the GM to correct because the GM can't just lower the treasure on everyone. Correcting this behavior requires the GM to become heavy handed, and thus a lot of players get away with it.
The group as a whole is more effective if everyone is paying the base cost; that way everyone gets more gear. If you charge them more than base cost only you are getting the lion's share of more gear. You have given up total group effectiveness for more personal gear; all under the guise of helping your fellow party members by charging them "less" than full price; a price you could never get from anyone else.
To me, that is most certainly metagaming. It is charging the only people in the world that have the capability of paying you more than 50%.
I have suggested a few reasons why that would not be the case, but I am not sure if you missed them or disregarded them because they may refute your argument.
I have responded to all of the scenarios I have seen.
Again, it's not necessarily greedy if you give all the money away to charity, but I don't think that's happening enough in this situation to warrant inclusion.
And buying party gear with the excess gold is just exercising power over the party by creating a situation in which they spend their money on what you deem is appropriate.
Finally, outfitting your familiar would be fine except I don't think it acknowledges the significant level of disparity in wealth.
MW: no worries. Just wanted to see where things were. This is a debate that tends to raise some blood pressure.
To the OP: What were your thoughts on the legacy item concept?
Honestly, between making reply posts, and tending to business and family . . . I've totally missed the legacy item post.
I'll go back through some posts to find it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a player asks the party crafter to craft something for him at cost, that player is STEALING from the crafter.
Example 1:
Fighter has 4000gp, he wants a 4,000gp sword. He goes to the shop and buys his sword. He has no gp and a 4000gp sword. Net profit: 0gp.
Example 2:
Fighter has 4000gp, he wants a 4,000gp sword. He decides a 25% discount is a good deal for him and pays the Wizard 3000gp. The Wizard uses 2000gp to make the Fighter his sword.
The Fighter now has 1000gp and a 4000gp sword for a total of 5000gp. Net profit: 1000gp.
The Wizard has 1000gp. Net profit: 1000gp.
Where did the extra money come from? From the Wizard's feat, of course. The Wizard "sold" his feat for potential cash later on, and is splitting the proceeds with the Fighter since, if the Fighter didn't request an item crafted, the feat wouldn't have made any money at all.
Example 3:
Fighter has 4000gp, he wants a 4,000gp sword. He doesn't think the Wizard should profit off of him, and demands the Wizard supply him a sword at cost. He pays the Wizard 2000gp and the Wizard makes him a sword.
The Fighter now has 2000gp and a 4000gp sword for a total of 6000gp. Net profit: 2000gp.
The Wizard has 0gp. Net profit: 0gp.
Notice how the Fighter has "stolen" all of the wealth generated by the Wizard's feat?
If the Fighter wants to take Combat Expertise and dual wield sickles, he has a "flavorful fighting style."
If the Rogue wants to take Skill Focus(Craft: Basket Weaving), he's a "role-player"
If the Cleric wants to take Extra Channel and play a pacifist, he's providing much needed healing.
If someone wants to play a Monk... well Monks are neat.
But if the Wizard takes a Craft feat, he's a greedy bastard who should be booted from the party unless he becomes the party craft-monkey. Never mind that a crafting Wizard, even one who charges, brings more to combat than the any of the above characters.
Don't sweat the implications of the wealth by level system if one PC takes a profit out of the others for magic item creation. That's their business, not the DM's. Just like division of treasure issues. Leave any of those arrangements up to the players and stay out of it as DM.
That said, I consider charging adventuring buddies a substantial amount over cost for magic item creation to be a colossally bad idea. The other players would have to be exceptionally tolerant for this to not harm party cohesion.
[/rant]
Really, though, crafting can have the tendency to let one (or more) character's wealth run away. A GM can handle this fairly easily by controlling the treasure handed out. Even in pre-written adventure, it's trivial for a GM not to hand out "this item" or "that bag of pp." If it's just one character, hand out a little more loot tailored for the other characters. The over wealthy character will have to sell more stuff for half, and the others won't need to pay the crafter. This will let the crafter have a little more wealth, without unbalancing the party
Jo Bird (sorry to single you out, but your large post is what prompted the question)
just curious here, but if the crafter is spending days/weeks/months crafting as a not-for-profit organisation and the rest of the party is using that time and their skill focus: profession (basket weaver) to make money over that time, is that still fair for the poor sod stuck in a lab and losing money (from cost of living if nothing else)?
sure, the amount of money a profession skill is raking in isn't going to compare to a quarter of the magic item price, but they're effectively getting wealth without any party contribution while the mage is benifiting the party by giving them the custom items they want.
so, on a purely selfish note, does that make skill focus: profession a better feat than craft magical item? (not a very serious question, but the point still lingers)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After reading through this if i were the party wizards i would point the party to a magic shop and let them spend full price if they are against spending 75% and the time i could be crafting for them i can spend on myself or even contact the magic shop and co-op my crafting to help him fill the parties orders and still make myself some money for what i do.
Jo Bird (sorry to single you out, but your large post is what prompted the question)
No problem, I will answer to the best of my ability.
just curious here, but if the crafter is spending days/weeks/months crafting as a not-for-profit organisation...
Please bear in mind, I am not advocating that the crafter has to craft for the party. That would be a personal decision the crafter makes, just like it would be a personal decision if the crafter did not craft anything, electing instead to put points in a profession skill, and practice it in lieu of crafting.
...and the rest of the party is using that time and their skill focus: profession (basket weaver) to make money over that time, is that still fair for the poor sod stuck in a lab and losing money (from cost of living if nothing else)?
1. They're not making an obscene amount of money doing so.
2. The crafter can elect to do the same if the crafter wishes.sure, the amount of money a profession skill is raking in isn't going to compare to a quarter of the magic item price, but they're effectively getting wealth without any party contribution...
Remember, they are doing so by using the rules. They have put points into their skill, and they are receiving income via the core rules of the game.
The fact that the income they are receiving is negligible is relevant. It gives us insight into the design of the game, and gives us a sense of how much money non-adventuring time should be able to accrue.
...while the mage is benifiting the party by giving them the custom items they want.
It is up to the crafter. The crafter can give the party equipment; the party can give him or herself equipment. Or the crafter can engage in another activity.
so, on a purely selfish note, does that make skill focus: profession a better feat than craft magical item? (not a very serious question, but the point still lingers)
Using a skill in the manner intended in the game does not make one selfish.
Crafting items and actively trying to gain wealth from doing so even when the Core Rules tell us you shouldn't is arguably greedy.
If a player wants to take item creation feats as an adventuring party member then they are doing so on the proviso they are supplying the party with 'for cost gear'. He is brionging to the party his skills as a craftsman. Thats his job in the party... thats why he gets his share of the loot.So nice of you to dictate how everyone ever is supposed to play the game.
Simply put, the group ALWAYS determines how you play the game. Think about it.
It's a party of likeminded people off to carry out dangerous and daring adventures, it isn't a happy Glee club that simply takes you as you are because they are all about acceptance and love.
If a player wants to do something that doesn't fit with the group mindset, why do you insist they be FORCED to accept a member they don't want who isn't doing what they need?
So if someone wants to take a tripple amputee juggler with no combat skills when the party needs a fighter then they MUST let that juggler join eh?
So nice of you to dictate how everyone ever is supposed to play the game. Selfish much?
You joined that party to do a job and were ALLOWED to join so you can do that job. You do not get an extra amount of money to do the job you were 'hired' to do.
Well, in a similar vein, I would like to say that our group (a different group) once had a thief--not a rogue, but a thief that got a little sticky fingered every now and again.
With money, you guys, with money. lol
Anyway we all knew what he was doing, but we also knew his character was a hoarder. He never spent any of that ill-gotten loot. Not one little copper. By the end of the campaign he had a bag of holding full of coins and gems and jewelry (nothing magical), but several hundred thousand in gold piece equivilant (and the campaign end at 15th level).
We didn't give him a hard time about it, because he wasn't using it to curb-stomp the party, or to show us up. He just really, really liked the idea of being able to retire to a sea-side villa somewhere and never having to adventure another day in his life.
He was a real Scrooge McDuck, and during the down-time, would sit around counting his retirement fund. But he never once picked one of the party's pockets, he didnt sneak into our rooms and steal our stuff, and he didn't (quite) try to cheat the party. Just, if he found ten gems in a chest, he made sure the party knew there were eight. And so-on-and-so-forth.
We let him do it, because he was having fun, and so were we. That is the difference, I think. The wiz in the OP is trying to make money to make himself better items; this guy was trying to make money so he could live out his days comfortably.
Just a few random thoughts.
Master Arminas
After reading through this if i were the party wizards i would point the party to a magic shop and let them spend full price if they are against spending 75% and the time i could be crafting for them i can spend on myself or even contact the magic shop and co-op my crafting to help him fill the parties orders and still make myself some money for what i do.
And how do you intend to make money working for the shop? Through your profession skill? Great. Here's a handful of coins.
Shifty I see no reason why i can't build a crafting wizard who can't pull his weight in combat/dungeon crawls so your arguement isn't really holding water on that note.
After reading through this if i were the party wizards i would point the party to a magic shop and let them spend full price if they are against spending 75% and the time i could be crafting for them i can spend on myself or even contact the magic shop and co-op my crafting to help him fill the parties orders and still make myself some money for what i do.And how do you intend to make money working for the shop? Through your profession skill? Great. Here's a handful of coins.
Diplomacy he now has orders to fill for my party i offer my services to the shop wizard for 20% or even 15% of the cost still netting him 30%-35% and he gets his money faster.
Shifty I see no reason why i can't build a crafting wizard who can't pull his weight in combat/dungeon crawls so your arguement isn't really holding water on that note.
Then I put it to you that the so called 'effort' and 'personal sacrifice' of being a crafter is then being way over stated and in that case doesn't warrant all this extra pay people are asking for to compensate their gigantic self sacrifice of precious feats.
Can't have it both ways guys.
EITHER its a significant investment of your Feat resource to the point people feel that compensation is warranted for their loss (despite the glaring fact that being a Crafter was their own personal choice and 100% up to them and the way they chose to play - why players should have to PAY YOU EXTRA for your gaming choice is beyond me, but thats another argument)
OR
It is no big deal like you suggest, in which case then why would they be looking for compensation for something that was no big deal and makes the PARTY they are involved with that much better?
Can't have it both ways, so which is it?
<snip thinly-veiled personal attacks>
Fozbek, if you are going to be precious and QQ about people pushing back on your personal attacks then perhaps you shouldn't start casting stones about eh?
I'm not going to even bother replying to your trite 'erroneous conclusion' one liners, as they are so categorically wrong there's little point explaining to you, lest you get upset and offended further.
If you play a crafter then that is 100% YOUR CHOICE. No one else made you do it.
Which is why the party members who want me to make no money extra can pay full price thats their choice. If they are under no obligation to pay me more than cost I am under none to make them anything. And for those that want cheaper items they will still get them.
Diplomacy he now has orders to fill for my party i offer my services to the shop wizard for 20% or even 15% of the cost still netting him 30%-35% and he gets his money faster.After reading through this if i were the party wizards i would point the party to a magic shop and let them spend full price if they are against spending 75% and the time i could be crafting for them i can spend on myself or even contact the magic shop and co-op my crafting to help him fill the parties orders and still make myself some money for what i do.And how do you intend to make money working for the shop? Through your profession skill? Great. Here's a handful of coins.
Are you even remotely serious?
Yeah, I use my diplomacy skill to make people pay me more than profession skill is worth. That makes sense.
I don't know who's running that game, but that's not how diplomacy works.