Fozbek I think we are done here.
Your contribution thus far consisted of an attack, and then an "I know you are but what am I" post.
I'll just continue talking with the other grown ups now.
Fozbek I think we are done here.
Your contribution thus far consisted of an attack, and then an "I know you are but what am I" post.
I'll just continue talking with the other grown ups now.
Pot, Kettle....
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.
So is it a big expenditure of your time effort and resource, or not a big spend of your time effort and resource?
I'm still waiting to find out if all this Crafting burden is actually significant or not?
I have given an A & B, so let me know which it is, or if I have it wrong illustrate why it is a C?
If it took no effort, then why are you getting 'compensated' to the tune of VERY significant sums?
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.
Profession covers menial work if thats the case then the shop owner can't be making near what he makes for his items. I'm not asking for a wage I'm selling my items to him at a boosted cost so he can sell his those items for even more than he pays me for them in total profit.
Thats where diplomacy comes in.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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
So, the skilled character can make 4000 gp extra a year, during downtime, while the crafter cannot charge a single extra gold piece for his year of work?
I know which I would consider greedier, and it is not the crafter.
Again based on the numbers someone else provided (no, I didn't check them :)), that means that at the end of twenty years, when everyone had their full quota of magical gear, each of the other three would be 80,000 gp richer than the crafter. And the crafter still isn't allowed to charge a single extra gold piece?
Also, please note that the Core Rule Book, page 140, says that generally items can only be sold at 50% if their value. I do not interpret that as can only, ever, be sold at 50%. Could you provide me with a reference where it does state that?
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.So is it a big expenditure of your time effort and resource, or not a big spend of your time effort and resource?
I'm still waiting to find out if all this Crafting burden is actually significant or not?
I have given an A & B, so let me know which it is, or if I have it wrong illustrate why it is a C?
If it took no effort, then why are you getting 'compensated' to the tune of VERY significant sums?
I make no arguement on it being an effort its cake it is 100% my choice as it is 100% their choice on who to buy their +2 item from me for 3000 or the shop for 4000
I make no arguement on it being an effort its cake it is 100% my choice as it is 100% their choice on who to buy their +2 item from me for 3000 or the shop for 4000
Ok so then if it takes little effort fo you, why are you making 1000gp off party members?
I think thats what I object to.
When they accepted your request to join the party, that came with the understanding you were bringing your whole resume to the party. The Fighter has his job to do, as does the Rogue and anyone else.
I'm just having difficulty seeing why a party member is milking their own party by selling them tools to help make the Crafter more money by being better adventurers... its (to me) as though the Crafter is double dipping.
I make no arguement on it being an effort its cake it is 100% my choice as it is 100% their choice on who to buy their +2 item from me for 3000 or the shop for 4000
Ok so then if it takes little effort fo you, why are you making 1000gp off party members?
I think thats what I object to.
When they accepted your request to join the party, that came with the understanding you were bringing your whole resume to the party. The Fighter has his job to do, as does the Rogue and anyone else.
I'm just having difficulty seeing why a party member is milking their own party by selling them tools to help make the Crafter more money by being better adventurers... its (to me) as though the Crafter is double dipping.
If it do it at cost then they get a profit for that +2 weapon they had to sell 8000 gold worth of magic items to get the 4000 gold for the enchant if they come to me they get to keep 1000 gold and i get 1000 gold if i do it for free they get to keep 2000 gold why can they profit and i can't?
Talonhawke,
You are profitting every time you craft something for yourself. Your party profits when you craft something for them. Unless you are not doing any crafting whatsoever for youself, you are already making the same profit that those other characters are--without charging them.
That is just how I see it.
Now, of course, player characters are entitled to do what they want. Doesn't mean they have to be included in the group anymore, though. I was wrong earlier in even suggesting to beat the wiz to a pulp: just kick him out of the party. Problem solved. Wizo Boy can go adventuring alone to earn his gold coins now.
Master Arminas
I think the point you all continue to miss is that it isn't taking the feat this is an enormous burden. It is shouldering everyone else's crafting for free.
Their cut of the party treasure is 8000.
Your cut is also 8000.
Thats the profit you should be making and the one you should be worried about.
By making their money go futher (buy more items to kill more stuff and make more money for themselves and you) the next time loot split time comes around the shares will be even higher again.
Your job as a party member is supopsed to be about building a solid party, not milking them for gold for little effort on your behalf, which is sort of how it comes across.
Either its a small effort, in which case why make a point of charging them a lot of gold for minimal work.
Or
Its a large effort which means you had to take efficiencies away elsewhere.
To solve this problem, the only Craftsmen I have seen in our groups have all been the Fighter types, making their own stuff. I've yet to see one consider charging more than cost for items, because everything they make goes towards helping THEM kill bad guys.
I think the point you all continue to miss is that it isn't taking the feat this is an enormous burden. It is shouldering everyone else's crafting for free.
OK I like that, its a stance.
So how does that burden play out in game time?
What is the effect on the craftsman?
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.
Ah, so if the group does not provide for some wands of CLW or such, then it is their tough luck if they need it and don't have it, even if the crafter used part of my wealth to make some for themselves, no one would have any trouble if they keep those wands strictly for their use? Somehow I don't see that working out well.
"Come on cleric, I know your out of spells and channels, but you can use your wands of CLWs, Lesser Restoration and Invisibility to get us out of here."
"Sorry fighter, you turned down my request for the party to fund my making these wands, so you are out of luck. Good luck and bye." Activates wand of invisibility.
Democracy is not always the best system for adventuring. I have been in groups where something similar to what I wrote above happened. The cleric had to extract an oath of getting a refund, to be sure that they would get back their gold.
Finally, outfitting your familiar would be fine except I don't think it acknowledges the significant level of disparity in wealth
Not sure if I have missed something, but I thought that the question was one about power level, that you were saying that the crafter would skyrocket past the other because they had so much more magical gear and more powerful magical gear. Now you seem to be talking about straight wealth.
Power wise, what does it matter if one fighter has a +2 sword and the other has a +2 work of art engraved sword (worth an extra 5000 gp)?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Crafting does nothing to imbalance the party. One character having higher GP reserves is nothing to worry about. Here's why: even if the total GP of the group were distributed equally, they could still pool their resources to buy more powerful items which would put their effective level higher than it otherwise would be. If crafting creates a "broken" group then you have failed as a GM by either letting an item exist where it truly shouldn't, letting the party be somewhere they shouldn't, or by providing a world where there are resources to make unbalancing items, which, given the later, is really everything leveling out. If you exist in a place where you can almost literally trip over magics and materials then you should EXPECT the party and its members to take advantage of this.
Regarding the intra-party economics, that should be totally left to the party members to decide. The reason why player characters exist is so there is a component to the game the GM does not dictate and thereby unexpected results can occur. No table top party I have been a member of has ever gone entirely according to script. Some party member inevitably does something clever or interesting that keeps things from getting stale. Otherwise, the gaming session is basically the GM reading from a script and everyone is just "reading their lines." If you actually like that sort of thing, I hope I never game with you. If there is a character in the group that is uncomfortable with another character's wealth, note I said character and not player, then that should be handled in game as that character see's fit that is inline with their abilities and ambitions. In short, there is no concrete answer or "correct view" to this as it depends on each individual party to decide. Personally, I would be grateful if I could save thousands of gold buying items from a party member versus some merchant who I, as a character, will probably never know if I'm getting raked over the coals or not concerning price.
And, let's be honest, the progression of encounters is a constant. A party never deals with a GM planned encounter that puts them at an incredible disadvantage unless that is the purpose of the encounter to begin with. Thus, all monsters, gear, magic, encounter and party GP, character abilities, character spells, etc should all net zero meaning that nothing the party can create should be able to truly outshine something they experience and nothing they experience should utterly crush the party. If it does, you have again failed as a GM to properly balance your encounters. At the end of the day, on average, the party should be kicking up their feat, albeit licking their wounds most likely, swigging back some ale at the local pub/inn sharing stories with the townsfolk about their crazy adventures.
Their cut of the party treasure is 8000.
Your cut is also 8000.Thats the profit you should be making and the one you should be worried about.
By making their money go futher (buy more items to kill more stuff and make more money for themselves and you) the next time loot split time comes around the shares will be even higher again.
Your job as a party member is supopsed to be about building a solid party, not milking them for gold for little effort on your behalf, which is sort of how it comes across.
Lets assume the 8000 is all gold for ease Mr fighter decides to make is MW bow and MW axe both +2 he is broke.
He comes to me and ask me to do it if I do it for free he now has enough left over two make his armor and shield +2 He is broke but with twice the gear if i hadn't take these feats.
In the time i make his 4 items for free its been over a week in which i couldn't do any work on my own gear so i still have the same gear and 8000 gold.
I still have at least 2 more people who want their 8000 gold turned into stuff as well who will probably complain their stuff is more important than mine so its 24 days before i can upgrade my stuff......oh crap they got more money in that time.
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.
I agree with that assessment of the rules, but I believe that it is a secondary consideration of the design. Most importantly, the economics of Pathfinder and of Dungeons & Dragons are greatly simplified from reality. The game designers assumed the players wanted an adventuring game rather than an economic game. Gaining significant wealth by crafting magic items would also introduce a significant economic factor into the game, so the designers chose the break-even point: magic items made by player characters can be sold at cost.
If the designers of Pathfinder had not chosen this break-even point, the GM could still prevent the crafter from gaining obscene wealth. Simply tell the crafter that he cannot sell that +2 longsword that he just made, because he flooded the local market with the other six +2 longswords that he made. And by the way, the special oil used as a compenent for enchanting magic weapons has doubled in price, so the cost of crafting magic weapons just increased. To rules lawyers, I would point out the "in general" qualifier in the description of item costs. If the players want to play an economic game, then I will give them an economic game.
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).
The party has two months of non-adventuring time and the wizard spends the time crafting. What is the rest of the party doing? I can imagine some players roleplaying their characters undergoing intensive training to explain their new abilities at a higher level. I can also imagine the players instead simply saying, "Okay, the wizard spends two months crafting our list of requested items, and then we head north to the ancient ruin we found the map for," without a thought for what their own characters were doing during those two months.
If the wizard is supposed to be crafting magic items at cost for the party during the non-adventuring time, then the other player characters have equal responsibility to use their time for the party. The paladin could be hobnobbing with the local militia, earning their goodwill so that the next time the party has a battle inside city walls, the guards will treat the party as the good guys. The bard and cleric can be doing the same goodwill work with the common people. The barbarian could have found a two-month job as a guard on a trade caravan and returned with not only an extra 1000gp in pocket, but also news from his home village to the north where an elderly wise man remembered ancient legends of the people in the ancient ruin.
If the players don't remember to fill their down time, the GM can nudge them. "The Church of Charity heard of an outbreak of the coughing plague in a village reachable only by goat paths. They need a fast runner to deliver a parcel of potions of Remove Disease. The barbarian has a reputation as a hero so they trust him and he does run fast. They cannot afford to pay anything, but they will owe the party a big favor and they always repay favors in good faith. Does your barbarian take the mission? He will return before the wizard is done."
If the player characters don't take the bait, then the non-dungeon time is not service time, and the wizard can claim any extra money he earns, even from fellow characters, without guilt.
For example, in my campaign the wizard does craft magic items for the party at cost. The sorcerer, on the other hand, is a businessman, and is investing heavily in the town itself, which does bring more wealth into the party. The bard mingles with the townfolk and gets along with everybody. The rogue is ever vigilant, guarding the party and following up on any rumors of trouble. He is the reason no-one touches the wizard's workshop while the party is out of town. The paladin returns to duty with the other paladins of Iomedae, with the side effect that every militia in the province will cooperate with the party while he is in it. The battle oracle is new to the area and still playing tourist. She also does not ask the wizard to make items for her.
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?
I have been working to correct a similar inbalance this weekend, during my breaks from food and family. The dwarf bard in our party has fewer magic items than the other players, because the player chose an odd introduction for her character. The character joined a 9th-level party as a 1st-level character and worked her way up to a 10th-level character in a 11th-and-12th-level party. This left her short on magic items, since she started from 1st-level wealth and the rogue was roleplaying a "go away, kid, stop following us on dangerous missions and, no, you don't get any treasure" attitude for the first four bard levels. Therefore, now I will be throwing a heap of treasure at the dwarf to bring her items into balance. An apologetic NPC will say, "Here are the villain's war trophies from raids against dwarves. Now that you defeated him, they ought to be returned to the dwarves. You are the only dwarf among the heroes, so I am giving them to you." I asked the player for a wish list, with the caveat that each item has to make sense as a war trophy and the total value can't be more than 50,000gp.
This is one reason that I ban all crafting feats (and the ability to enchant items through mundane craft) in games that I run (as opposed to games that I play in). It's not Economics & Entrepeneurs, people, it's Dungeons & Dragons (well, Pathfinder, but same thing).
Master Arminas
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So in the same breath I could also say:
MR Craftswizzy cashes in his 8kgp worth of stuff and sets about making himself some cool toys. Mr Fighter guy comes along with a bag of gold and some excitement in his eyes and asks for some work to be done.
"No worries" says the Wizard, "when I am finished crafting my stuff I will get on to yours in my spare time". The other two party members turn up with similar bags of gold and a shopping list.
"No problems guys, in my spare time I will knock out those items, assuming there's no adventuring going on or we have to go running someowhere else, and assuming my stuff is all sorted... then Ill start making items one at a time, taking it in turns"
"Well I'm in a bit of a hurry" says the Rogue.
"No worries" says the Wizzycrafter, "There's a shop down the road will do it for you on the spot, they are pricey though".
This is one reason that I ban all crafting feats (and the ability to enchant items through mundane craft) in games that I run (as opposed to games that I play in). It's not Economics & Entrepeneurs, people, it's Dungeons & Dragons (well, Pathfinder, but same thing).
Master Arminas
I just provided players with an in-game mechanic to build up capacity to start obtaining cut price items by making the right friends and connections.
Solved the problem pretty much.
So in the same breath I could also say:
MR Craftswizzy cashes in his 8kgp worth of stuff and sets about making himself some cool toys. Mr Fighter guy comes along with a bag of gold and some excitement in his eyes and asks for some work to be done.
"No worries" says the Wizard, "when I am finished crafting my stuff I will get on to yours in my spare time". The other two party members turn up with similar bags of gold and a shopping list.
"No problems guys, in my spare time I will knock out those items, assuming there's no adventuring going on or we have to go running someowhere else, and assuming my stuff is all sorted... then Ill start making items one at a time, taking it in turns"
"Well I'm in a bit of a hurry" says the Rogue.
"No worries" says the Wizzycrafter, "There's a shop down the road will do it for you on the spot, they are pricey though".
By some peoples response on this thread the wizard is booted from the party for being selfish.
By some peoples response on this thread the wizard is booted from the party for being selfish.
Not really, I haven't seen anyone demand that not only must the wizard not make any bucks, but must also give the party first priority.
If the party members demand express treatment then the Wizzycrafter really IS losing out and is being treated quite poorly. Normal and reasonable people would expect that he would sort out his own stuff first, unless of course all parties (including him) were trying to get a McGuffin made to finish quest/save world etc.
Ok so then if it takes little effort fo you, why are you making 1000gp off party members?
I think thats what I object to.
When they accepted your request to join the party, that came with the understanding you were bringing your whole resume to the party. The Fighter has his job to do, as does the Rogue and anyone else.
I'm just having difficulty seeing why a party member is milking their own party by selling them tools to help make the Crafter more money by being better adventurers... its (to me) as though the Crafter is double dipping.
I don't think that I have ever been in a group that looked over my characters résumé and decided whether the PC should be allowed to join the group. :)
As the crafter faces the same dangers and helps as much as the others during the adventure, they get a full share of the loot.
During downtime, if they decided to craft items, that is a separate thing from combat and any revenue that they generate is not what I would consider double dipping.
I will ask those who appear so vehemently opposed to the crafter gaining any extra gold if there is a point where you would accept that the crafter gains a bit of extra gold?
That is, if the crafter only charged an extra 5%, would that be acceptable? If not, why not?
Also, do your groups have a party pool and if so, do you pay for the upkeep of the crafter while they are crafting?
If no party pool, who pays for the weeks and months of upkeep for the crafter?
Cost of living, page 405 Core Rule Book. I would expect that the party crafter would at least be in a wealthy living arrangement, so 100 gp per month.
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.
Taking a crafting feat is not a sacrifice. At its base, you get to make the stuff YOU want for yourself, and convert YOUR magical loot into the desired items with zero losses (sell at 50%, make at 50%). This takes you some time between adventures, and generally when you're personally benefiting, that's not a big deal.
Now, suddenly everyone else in the group wants you to make stuff as well. As pointed out above, that's time the crafter could make money with craft/profession if he so chose. For some characters, that's time they could be copying spells into their book/familiar.
So if you have downtime, and are using it to make other people magic items at cost, you ARE suffering personal loss - fewer spells in spellbooks (a big deal for some characters), fewer GP in your pocket, less time to do other stuff you might have wanted.
Again, the problem here is that the crafter is operating in a vacuum. Are the other PCs providing services in downtime that benefit the group as well? If the answer is YES, then the crafter probably shouldn't charge for it. If the answer is NO, then why does the rest of the group expect the crafter to do it at all, let alone without compensation?
Bottom line, the non-crafters are benefiting MORE from the crafter's feat choice than he is himself if he doesn't charge. They get items at cost, but spend no time making them (and can go off and make some loose change in the meantime). That's something the crafter doesn't even get. When he makes item at cost, he has to spend the time to make them. The crafter is behind on WBL (if only a little) compared to the rest of the party and probably behind where he should be in personal power because he has no downtime to add spells to his repertoire, make personal connections, etcetera.
"But the group is stronger, so the caster benefits" might come the reply. This would also be true if the party paid the crafter a little extra. The crafter would have more money to make items for himself, and the group is therefore stronger, so the party also benefits - the logic works both ways.
Fighter: "Give me a more powerful sword for cost; I'll be better able to defend you skinny wizard behind that way."
Wizard: "Pay me above cost, and I'll make a magic item so that you're less likely to need to defend my skinny wizard behind, I'll be able to buff you more effectively, or my save-or-suck spells will be all the more powerful, ending fights more efficiently."
Since most crafters are casters, and most casters are top tier characters, boosting your casters is the most effective way to make the group more powerful. Tongue firmly in cheek, why spend money making the rogue halfway decent when you can make the wizard super-duper-awesome?
Look, I'm all for crafters doing their thing and making the party better. If the fighter has 'just enough' to make his sword +3 (at cost), if I was the wizard I'd probably do it because it's smart to do so. That said, when I level up and hit the new tier of spells and need a few hundred extra gold to pad up my spellbook, tossing a moneybag my way is a VERY smart thing for the fighter to do.
For example, in my campaign the wizard does craft magic items for the party at cost. The sorcerer, on the other hand, is a businessman, and is investing heavily in the town itself, which does bring more wealth into the party. The bard mingles with the townfolk and gets along with everybody. The rogue is ever vigilant, guarding the party and following up on any rumors of trouble. He is the reason no-one touches the wizard's workshop while the party is out of town. The paladin returns to duty with the other paladins of Iomedae, with the side effect that every militia in the province will cooperate with the party while he is in it. The battle oracle is new to the area and still playing tourist. She also does not ask the wizard to make items for her.
That sounds like a good arrangement and I doubt that any crafter that I would make would have an issue with crafting at cost for that group. Hmm, well, I may ask the paladin to set me up with.... :)
My biggest issue with the whole "the crafter has to craft at cost for the party" is that the crafter is using all their downtime to do so, while the rest of the party seems to have lots of free time.
And I am far happier with those points of view, which are much more reasoned than simply profiteering off the party.
Indeed if the party is wandering about going back to their day jobs between adventuring then I don't think they are taking their adventuring jobs very seriously, as there is other work to do (which Mathmuse has nicely pointed out).
Similarly the party might CHOOSE to pool their funds to help the Wizzy buy X-Spell etc, or chip in to buy the Crafting related spells from which they will derive a benefit. Unfair to ask the Wizard to foot the bill for doing you a favour.
This is one reason that I ban all crafting feats (and the ability to enchant items through mundane craft) in games that I run (as opposed to games that I play in). It's not Economics & Entrepeneurs, people, it's Dungeons & Dragons (well, Pathfinder, but same thing).
Next campaign I run, all item crafting takes 1 hour. It takes 1 day per 1000gp to gather the ingredients, and anybody can do the shopping. Fighter shows up with a bag of gold and a request for a +2 sword, you write him an ingredient list and let HIM spend the next 8 days filling it out.
Helic I'd go happily one step further and have the party questing for the parts, but that would make me a badwrongfunGM according to a lot of posters! :p
Helic I'd go happily one step further and have the party questing for the parts, but that would make me a badwrongfunGM according to a lot of posters! :p
Not from me.
But it would be hard to fit into most adventure paths (Kingmaker being the exception).
Helic I'd go happily one step further and have the party questing for the parts, but that would make me a badwrongfunGM according to a lot of posters! :p
Heaven forbid that the PCs create their own adventure hooks!
Fighter: "I need a more powerful sword!"
Wizard: "No problem, I just need some Owlbear claws, sap from mountain flowers on Hag Peak, and crushed garnet recently pried from the bowels of the earth."
Fighter: "Road trip!!"
|
What I don't get why is it that people only complain that the wizard (crafter) is profiting and demand that the requester be the only one that profit (aka wizard charging for cost)?
Lets say the fighter wants gauntlets of orge strength and noticed that that it would cost 4,000 to buy at the market. If he goes to the wizard buys it for 2,000. In that scenario has indirectly profited of the wizards work by not having to spend the extra 2,000.
By charging the 75% both the fighter and wizard both profited equally. For example the fighter pays 3,000 for the gauntlets and have an extra 1,000 to spend on other items, while wizard also profit by taking up his time, which he could've used for himself.
|
|
What many folks here seem to be missing is that it's not an in-game issue.
Let me say that again: it's not an in-game issue.
Whether the characters agree to pay the caster or not, whether the caster makes a profit or not, how much he charges - none of that matters. Are the PLAYERS (and yes, the GM is one of the players) having fun? If so, then whichever choice you made was the right one. If not, and the reason is because the party's unbalanced due to wealth disparity, then it needs to be fixed. I've got a wizard in my home game (I'm the GM) who's taken a few creation feats, and the only involvement I've had so far was to ensure that all the players knew that the wizard would be making a profit on the deal - and I only did so because I've got a few fairly new players in the group. Now, if the wizard becomes so powerful from crafting that any encounter that'll challenge him would likely kill other characters, then there's a problem, and I'll deal with it. Before it becomes a problem. My characters understand that the bad guys know who they are, and that the bad guys' tactics have changed due to the party's abilities. If one of the characters becomes a bigger threat than the others, he's likely to live a more interesting life for awhile.
Profession covers menial work if thats the case then the shop owner can't be making near what he makes for his items. I'm not asking for a wage I'm selling my items to him at a boosted cost so he can sell his those items for even more than he pays me for them in total profit.
Thats where diplomacy comes in.
Again, that's not how diplomacy works. It does not allow you to sell your items at a "boosted" cost.
So, the skilled character can make 4000 gp extra a year, during downtime, while the crafter cannot charge a single extra gold piece for his year of work?
I know which I would consider greedier, and it is not the crafter.
I have no idea what you're talking about, really.
The crafter: if the crafter charges extra then the crafter is making obscene amounts of money -- far more than any profession skill can accrue over generations.
The crafter is violating the rule that says that magic items are sold at half cost, and is meta gaming to do so by taking advantage of his or her knowledge that PCs can spend more than everyone else in the world.
The crafter is also double dipping for benefits. The most important benefit is getting a 50% cost break on creating items. This leads to the benefit of being stronger on adventures, which helps to secure the rewards of treasure, i.e. payment.
When the crafter decides they want to get more money by charging more than base cost they are double dipping to get extra benefit, and effectively meta gaming because they know darn well that they can't upcharge anyone else; nope, no one else, just their friends/adventuring business partners. When you think about it it's pretty despicable.
Practicing your skill, following the rules in the book for that skill, and taking your income after rolling your d20 -- that's not greedy. The income here is most certainly deserved, after all, the player is following the rules of the game.
Again based on the numbers someone else provided (no, I didn't check them :)), that means that at the end of twenty years, when everyone had their full quota of magical gear, each of the other three would be 80,000 gp richer than the crafter. And the crafter still isn't allowed to charge a single extra gold piece?
You are arbitrarily assuming a time frame of twenty years. I have no idea why.
You are arbitrarily assuming a return of 4,000 gold pieces a year. I have no idea why.
Regardless, this figure comes nowhere near the amount achievable through the sell of magic items at inflated prices.
In addition, the crafter is free to practice a profession as well. Though that would be silly since the extra gold (50%) the crafter is saving by following the rules is already substantially more than the profession skill brings to the table.
Also, please note that the Core Rule Book, page 140, says that generally items can only be sold at 50% if their value. I do not interpret that as can only, ever, be sold at 50%. Could you provide me with a reference where it does state that?
That's one of the silliest questions possible. I'm somewhat disappointed that you've asked it. It makes me wonder why I'm spending time in this debate.
Can you provide me with a reference where it allows you to sell items at a rate higher or lower than 50%?
See, I've already provided you with the quote where you can sell items at 50%. Generally pretty much means without regard to particulars or exceptions. Paizo has left open the possibility for exceptions. But Paizo has yet to provide any exceptions beyond rule 0.
It's clear to anyone who reads the system that the game is designed to only allow a modest income from not adventuring. It does so to provide players with an incentive to adventure.
I don't understand why all of this is so hard for some of you guys to get.
I think the point you all continue to miss is that it isn't taking the feat this is an enormous burden. It is shouldering everyone else's crafting for free.
Boo hoo?
I don't know what to tell you.
It's not for free. You get party treasure out of adventuring -- not to mention survivability. You get all of that for some preliminary prep work.
I'm a firm advocate of allowing the player to use a feat in whatever dumb manner they want. I believe a crafter doesn't have to craft for fellow party members if they don't want to. Is that an effective use of the feat? Heck no. But it's something they can choose to do, just like another character can choose to use a feat poorly somewhere else. It's all a part of the learning curve.
However, trying to up-charge PCs for your services -- that's cheating the system, and meta gaming.
|
|
The crafter: if the crafter charges extra then the crafter is making obscene amounts of money -- far more than any profession skill can accrue over generations.
The crafter is violating the rule that says that magic items are sold at half cost, and is meta gaming to do so by taking advantage of his or her knowledge that PCs can spend more than everyone else in the world.
No matter how you resolve the issue of how much the caster charges, once you allow creation feats, the WBL is going to get broken. It doesn't matter if the caster gets the gold, or the fighter gets it, or they split it. They've still got more gold to spend on items. They're still going to get two items for the price of one. So the solution would either be to disallow item creation feats entirely, as some have suggested, or to take actions as GM to ensure party balance, or to ignore the issue and hope no one has less fun as a result. Because it's all about fun, right? That is why we play this game, right?
Ah, so if the group does not provide for some wands of CLW or such, then it is their tough luck if they need it and don't have it, even if the crafter used part of my wealth to make some for themselves, no one would have any trouble if they keep those wands strictly for their use? Somehow I don't see that working out well.
The above reads somewhat like gibberish to me. I'm having trouble making out exactly what you're saying.
1. No one should use your wealth for you.
2. Unless you give it to them to do just that.
3. Instead, the crafter has taken your money.
4. Under the pretense that it's for a crafted item.
5. And then supposedly spent hundreds of thousands of gold.,
6. On cure light wounds and stuff.
7. Why didn't the crafter give you the item at cost?
8. And then say, "hey, I think we need to spend party treasure on cure potions, and wands."
9. That way you, as an adult, get to decide where your share of money goes.
You are failing to see the level of obscene wealth the crafter is making.
"Come on cleric, I know your out of spells and channels, but you can use your wands of CLWs, Lesser Restoration and Invisibility to get us out of here."
"Sorry fighter, you turned down my request for the party to fund my making these wands, so you are out of luck. Good luck and bye." Activates wand of invisibility.
Getting your party to work together does not require an overall redistribution of wealth so the crafter has far more wealth.
Democracy is not always the best system for adventuring. I have been in groups where something similar to what I wrote above happened. The cleric had to extract an oath of getting a refund, to be sure that they would get back their gold.
The party can choose a party leader if they want. If the crafter is trying to take your money to decide how to use it for you then you have to decide if you want to do that. Not the crafter, and certainly not under the false pretense of charging you more than base cost.
Not sure if I have missed something, but I thought that the question was one about power level, that you were saying that the crafter would skyrocket past the other because they had so much more magical gear and more powerful magical gear. Now you seem to be talking about straight wealth.
I'm still talking about the crafter skyrocketing in power because of inflated wealth.
I'm telling you that the extra wealth being gained is far more than what is required to outfit a familiar. And, on some level, I'm telling you that I don't have a clue what your example is trying to say.
If you have a familiar and a cohort, and think you need extra money to outfit both, well, you're the one that's stretched yourself too thin. That's part of the deal with having a familiar and a cohort.
If the party elects to help you out with the outfitting of your familiar, and your cohort then that's fine. Your party can do so if they want. But the game does not dictate that they have to make your build easier to accomplish with their gold. Their gold is there to outfit themselves, and to outfit any cohorts or familiars they take.
Power wise, what does it matter if one fighter has a +2 sword and the other has a +2 work of art engraved sword (worth an extra 5000 gp)?
This is irrelevant to the point of whether or not the crafter should charge more than it costs to make. It is irrelevant in terms of how much extra money the crafter is getting.
The players are free to spend their money however they want. They are free to spend it in a manner that is effective, and they are free to spend it in a manner that is not effective.
Do you guys have experience with this? Does this create a problem? If so, any ideas on how to handle this problem? I'm trying to address problems before they occur in the game, and I'm concerned that this might tip the scales of balance.
It can create problems. Some players are extremely threatened by others getting anything more then they get. If you have a mature group it shouldn't be an issue. If you don't have a mature group then expect all manner of abuse from all sides of the table. But then if you have an immature group you probably have more issues than this one at your table.
Player Y, being a barbarian, finds out about Player X's scheme when Player Z, the party rogue that Player X won't cut in on the deal tells him how he is being used. Player Y beats Player X within an inch of his life for 'overcharging him' and loots his home, kills his familar, and burns his spellsbooks, breaking his jaw and all ten fingers for good measure before leaving.
Wow... arminas clearly favors evil aligned parties. And that is one foolish barbarian. He is unsatisfied because he is getting a discount on magic items, so he destroys any chance he would ever get a discount again? In fact it is also possible the barbarian now has to rely on whatever cut of loot randomly drops from now on while the rest of the party has custom made and discounted gear... yeah not very bright of the barbarian. I can see an evil rogue acting in such a fashion as to turn people against each other for personal profit, but really that barbarian needs to buy a clue.
If I was feeling petty however, I'd get my broken bones healed/regenerated, then kill the barbarian and trap his soul. Maybe research some spell to create a private, personalized hell for him. There's no pain a barbarian can inflict that a caster can't return sevenfold.
Well arminas does support an evil play style. This wizard fits right in with the rogue and barbarian.
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.
What an odd viewpoint. If I have a friend who owns a Pizza place. And I get discounts on pizza there. I certainly don't expect it to be my right to have pizza AT COST. In fact I would see it as nice that my friend offers me discounts on all my pizza purchases. I would probably go out of my way in return to recommend that pizza to others.
Look at it this way this is an outside benefit not a part of adventuring. It would be the same as if you demanded the fighter guard your home day and night while not adventuring. I am fairly sure he would be offended.
Crafting lets the user be better equipped than standard in exchange for some number of feats and skills. So the real issue is why are you getting angry when this person offers to share this benefit with you in exchange for extra gold from adventuring. You wouldn't be concerned at all if the person just made items for himself and didn't try to "profit" off them from the group. Yet by sharing this with the group he is actually elevating everyone's level of gear. You are GAINING from this. And you are upset because he is also gaining by the transaction?!
PS- Jo Bird: It has always been my view that wealth by level is NOT taken to mean half price on magic items. If I started a character at a higher level I would pay full price from my starting funds for magic items. Those funds are set by wealth by level. So effectively item creation feats can up to double the effective wealth of the character taking them (at the cost of feats and skills), since he effectively pays half price for any items he can build himself.
This means there is already an imbalance in the value of the gear of the characters. The transaction doesn't create an imbalance, It simply sells some of that imbalance back to the others in exchange for money.
So I am flipping that around and pointing out that the other side of the coin must therefore be a less effective caster. If the caster is reduced in effectiveness because he is skilled in non-casting activities at casting expense, then why should he be 'charging the party' his full share of treasure?
He isn't less effective... he is likely better equipped than the wizard who bought spell penetration feats instead. It is a trade off. He is charging the party for his time and effort to make them Better equipped as well.
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.
Um... no. His feats make him better equipped. This is what he brings to the party as part of the team. And what concern is it of yours anyway whether he is optimized the way YOU want him to be?! He wanted to play someone who tinkers around the shop. It is HIS character not yours... are you also screaming at the poor player who bought skill focus in a profession skill that he isn't pulling his full weight in the party?
"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 item you were too busy to make a few weeks back I might have been able to help you out."
Wow that is one arrogant barbarian. But then since his party plays evil anyway, I wouldn't expect anything better from the barbarian. The barbarian is now willing to throw away teamwork because the wizard wouldn't work as his slave for months on end... wow. Well that cuts both ways... I would be willing to guess that the wizard doesn't blast any creatures that are attacking the barbarian either. I can't imagine this play group gets very far in adventures. Heck the cleric probably only heals his own wounds too... I am glad I don't have to play in this group.
My position is that the caster is attaining obscene wealth through the above cost sale of magic items to party members.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.
-=-
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.
-=-
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.
It is item creation that creates the imbalance NOT selling the items for whatever value the players come up with. If you want perfectly balanced wealth by level then you need to ban all crafting and profession skills. In fact you will probably have to enforce an even treasure division rule as well, since it is actually quite rare in my experience to find a perfectly even treasure division system. And just about every group I have played in does this differently.
-=-Um... I find it odd that you only apply half the value of magical items in the treasure? When a sword is worth 2000 gold then that is what it is worth... if the characters don't need it and sell it for 50% they are undercutting their wealth by level by 1000 gold divided by the number of players.
-=-
Whoa... All feats are certainly NOT created equal. This is the foundation for countless builds filling countless web documents. It has effective been proven true by raw weight of evidence. You can't assume all feats are equal, they are not equal.
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.
Thank You. This is someone who sees the big picture. This is exactly what is happening. The creation feat is generating wealth.
He isn't less effective... he is likely better equipped than the wizard who bought spell penetration feats instead. It is a trade off. He is charging the party for his time and effort to make them Better equipped as well.
Then the argument stands that if the whole Crafting caper is no great investment of capacity on behalf of the player, and involves little time and effort, then why are they being paid significant sums of money to do work that takes no time or effort on the party's behalf.
Either its a significant investment, for which they are seeking compensation, or it's not.
Um... no. His feats make him better equipped. This is what he brings to the party as part of the team. And what concern is it of yours anyway whether he is optimized the way YOU want him to be?! He wanted to play someone who tinkers around the shop. It is HIS character not yours... are you also screaming at the poor player who bought skill focus in a profession skill that he isn't pulling his full weight in the party?
Exactly! The Wizard is contributing by being better equipped. That's why he chose to "sell" his feats. BUT! If you force the Wizard to give away the wealth generated by his feats, (which is exactly what he is doing if creates items for the party at cost,) the advantage vanishes, he isn't contributing as much as his allies, and he sold his feats for nothing.
Or rather, he sold his feats to empower his allies, rather than himself. Which is fine if that's what a character whats to do. There's nothing stopping, or wrong with, a character giving half his loot away to the rest of his party. There IS something wrong with forcing him to do so.
Of course, if you allow a player to give away his wealth, the party will become unbalanced, so the GM will be forced to step in. Cause that's what this whole thread is about, right? A disparity in party wealth?
No, thats not true.
He will still be buying his own gear at 50%.
If he never made anything for himself then no he would be trading Feats for free, but if he's making gear for himself he is always 'profiting from his Feat'.
He hasn't 'given away' anything, unless he was PAYING for the base cost of them items and gifting that to the party members.
He isn't less effective... he is likely better equipped than the wizard who bought spell penetration feats instead. It is a trade off. He is charging the party for his time and effort to make them Better equipped as well.
Then the argument stands that if the whole Crafting caper is no great investment of capacity on behalf of the player, and involves little time and effort, then why are they being paid significant sums of money to do work that takes no time or effort on the party's behalf.
Either its a significant investment, for which they are seeking compensation, or it's not.
This is where your losing it. The "Crafting Caper" IS a great investment of capacity, but it has significant payoff in the form of extra wealth. Denying the player that extra wealth defeats the purpose of the feat.
If a Wizard crafts only for himself, he will be just as goo as a Wizard who spent his feats on other things. His relative contribution to the party will have been unchanged, and the status quo is maintained. (That's the theory anyway.
If the Wizard crafts for free, the rest of the party will have gotten better, but the Wizard won't improve any further. Now the Wizard isn't pulling his weight any more. He's equally equipped, but down several feats.
So, what's the point of keeping around this worthless lump of a Wizard, UNLESS his continued crafting has value? And if it does, should not the Wizard receive some compensation for his valuable service.
Clearly, crafting at cost is too low, and crafting for full price is too high. Somewhere in the middle is the sweet spot of "Just Right." Maybe it's 60%, maybe 75%, maybe 90%. But, it's definately in the middle somewhere.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The players are free to spend their money however they want. They are free to spend it in a manner that is effective, and they are free to spend it in a manner that is not effective.
Thank you for making my point. You are free to spend 4000g on your sword or 3000g its up to you.
This is where your losing it. The "Crafting Caper" IS a great investment of capacity, but it has significant payoff in the form of extra wealth. Denying the player that extra wealth defeats the purpose of the feat.
OK so then you are taking the opposite stance of all the Crafting Wizards who suggest that the investment they make is not that great and they are "still able to hold their own" and are "just as effective as non crafting wizards".
In which case, your investment in the Feats means that until significant time has passed for you to amass the wealth required to build more items you aren't doing the job as good as a dedicated Blasto-Wiz and therefore the party has to carry you. Given that your contribution is now LESS than it should be, the party is well within their rights to pay you only a fractional share of the loot.
It's ok though, because you will make back the money when you craft stuff.
If all we are getting is discounts at your shop, then it's probably better just to be your friend and stop by when we need something and instead take Blasto-Wiz on adventures instead, because he at least pulls his weight and we will be financially in front.
It's not up to the party to subsidise your Playstyle choice of being a crafter.
Being a Crafter means you make your gear for 50% cost, that was the benefit for you from the Feat. You are trading that for effectiveness on the table, which is a burden you are now placing on the party - charging them to carry you is a bit far.