It is very easy to become more powerful with much more wealth. Create a 10th level wizard with 62000 gold and another with 118,000 gold but only 3,000 can be anything. The remaining 115,000 is "limited" to wondrous items and scrolls that he meets the requirements for (or can ignore if he can afford the increase in DC). I'm willing to bet that there will be a noticeable...I'm betting the one with greater wealth will have a greater breadth of options, but the one with the two extra feats will have greater raw power, TBH.
There are a lot of good feats and metamagic and such to conisder, and you can't Stack metamagic rods.
Obviously it's all going to depend on the other feat (Craft Wondrous Item is only a 1 feat investment and Scribe Scroll is free). The character with that much more wealth is going to noticeably more powerful. It gets worse as he levels too. Especially if you do allow his craft feats to exceed the WBL. Since he can take more craft feats, he has far more versatility and power. Once he gets Craft Staff, you should see a pretty decent increase in power. Note that during the down time of crafting, he can be recharging the staffs that he had used.
Allowing the crafter to craft custom items is very tangible. I don't see any need to set an arbitrary cap above what the system assumes just because a player spends a feat slot. Customization is incredibly tangible.Does this mean that a non-crafter cannot commission a custom magic item from a crafter?
This is where we start to run into the exact reason why I limit customization for starting items to what the individual character can make. If you take an Item Creation feat, you should get a benefit. Just like the wizard can't "borrow" the fighter's Toughness feat, the fighter can't "borrow" the wizard's Craft Wondrous Item feat.
|
Also, to all of you who are saying that "double wealth" is obviously an overpowering benefit: You may want to check the math on that. Bonuses on items require exponential wealth investment. Investing double the amount of wealth on one item generally only results in about a +1 bonus over what it had. Do this on the big six (assuming you even have all of those items) and you net a an average of about +3.5 to AC and a +1.5 on saves, attack and damage and +0.5 HP per level and +0.5 skill points per level and lastly +0.5 on skill checks. Obviously this is worth a lot more than a feat. But how many is it worth? The +1.5 on all saves is a net of +4.5, or about 2 feats. The AC is 3.5 feats. The attack is 1.5 feats. The damage is about 1 feat. The HP and skill points are each half feats. +0.5 on skill checks applies to a lot of skills, but isn't a huge benefit. Probably worth a feat. Total worth: 10 feats. There might be some other minor benefits in there, but most likely not hugely significant.
For most players "double wealth" don't mean "I will sink that extra 18K gold to make my +4 weapon a +5 weapon".
It mean "II will upgrade my strength belt from +2 to +4 and add +2 dexterity (+1 to hit, damage, AC and Reflex saves for exactly 18K)".If the player can choose the gear he prefer spreading his extra wealth around will give him a noticeable boos in power, and that is what most character created at high level will do.
About adjusting the WBL in play for crafter and non crafter:
you don't need to place less loot (it could backfire if the players evaluate the sell price of the items and then divide the loot in shares with the same gp value). The best solution is to place loot that is more interesting for the guys without crafting feats. That way the crafter will be selling most of the loot and use the money to craft what he want while the non crafter will generally keep the stuff that was found. You get a rough parity in WBL going this way.
It doesn't actually change anything I have said. You can either buy what's in the book or you can customize if you have the requisite skills/feats.
Let's say you are a ranger and you rolled well on your starting gold. You managed to roll 200 gold. You also put 1 rank into Craft Armor. Let's give you an Intelligence of 14 and you took Skill Focus (Craft Armor) and a trait that gives you +1. That puts you at +10 to craft. You want to make a ironwood masterwork wooden armor (I don't know why, but it's what you want to do). It's value is 170 gold. It's within your budget. You can Take 10 and easily make this armor at 1st level. Go for it. It's not an "off the shelf item" so another character won't start with it. So you got to benefit from your feats and skills. You have something no one else has. You still have 30 gold left over for some basic gear like 2 short swords and survival gear (which you may not need since you can still put a rank into Survival and take a feat to give you a bonus).
Negative.
The craft skill states it only costs 1/3 the cost in raw materials to craft an item, this applies even to mastercraft items. So, if the total cost of this armor is 170 gp, it would only cost a crafter 56 GP to purchase the raw materials and some time to do the crafting. It does not cost the crafter the full 170 GP to create said piece of armor.
If a player came to me and said, "hey I found a way to double my gear by taking a craft feat." I would say, "that's not what it's for. Here's how it is supposed to work and why." My players don't come to the table with characters I haven't looked over. I generally see new characters weeks in advance and I work with the players to make sure that the characters fit in the world and that the characters fill the roles the players want. I make sure they understand how their choices work. Sometimes they read things differently than I do and it's important to make sure we are all on the same page. As GM I have final say but that doesn't mean I don't listen and...I'm not saying that's how it should be. If I came to you as a player and said "hey I'm taking this crafting feat" the reply I'd expect out of you would consist of two parts. First, how much time will you give my character to say he's been crafting. This may need discussion on the characters mindset and goals, etc and it may not. Second, are there any specific material restrictions? Mithral or adamantine may be in particular short supply and that's fine but tell me sooner rather than later.
After that, I'd expect you to basically back off. I can only craft so much GP worth items with the amount of time you gave me so that really should be the limiting factor and not the overall amount of GP with which I can craft. The breakdowns the book gave don't have crafting and non-crafting related percentages so crafting should not be a factor in those equations outside of "does my level 10 character even have time to craft 10,000 GP worth of items?"
I actually have had players ask me how much downtime they have between adventures so they can figure out what they can make.
For the most part, I don't restrict what can be crafted so long as the character is in a place where he can craft. He's not going to be making an adamantine set of full plate while adventuring. If he wants to make that suit while he's back at town, so long as he can find the materials (I use the size of the locale to determine this just like I would for magic items). This would end up bringing us to a discussion of how horrible the Craft Skills are, but that's a different discussion that brings us to house rules.
There are a lot of good feats and metamagic and such to conisder, and you can't Stack metamagic rods.Obviously it's all going to depend on the other feat (Craft Wondrous Item is only a 1 feat investment and Scribe Scroll is free). The character with that much more wealth is going to noticeably more powerful. It gets worse as he levels too. Especially if you do allow his craft feats to exceed the WBL. Since he can take more craft feats, he has far more versatility and power. Once he gets Craft Staff, you should see a pretty decent increase in power. Note that during the down time of crafting, he can be recharging the staffs that he had used.
I really dont see how this theoretical crafter is going to exceed the guy who can drop a quad-metamagicked spell or whatever other tricks he has access to because he has an ever increasing number of additional feats over the guy who keeps dropping his feats and time into expanding his potential wealth.
The examples you give, such as Staves, dont actually increase the Wielders power a significant degree; they add endurance, or options, and occasionally increase the wielders power a bit (IE, rods), but its not like the person with normal wealth loses out on these; they just have less of them, or slightly inferior versions of them (a +2 weapon vs. a +3, again for reference)
It doesn't actually change anything I have said. You can either buy what's in the book or you can customize if you have the requisite skills/feats.
Let's say you are a ranger and you rolled well on your starting gold. You managed to roll 200 gold. You also put 1 rank into Craft Armor. Let's give you an Intelligence of 14 and you took Skill Focus (Craft Armor) and a trait that gives you +1. That puts you at +10 to craft. You want to make a ironwood masterwork wooden armor (I don't know why, but it's what you want to do). It's value is 170 gold. It's within your budget. You can Take 10 and easily make this armor at 1st level. Go for it. It's not an "off the shelf item" so another character won't start with it. So you got to benefit from your feats and skills. You have something no one else has. You still have 30 gold left over for some basic gear like 2 short swords and survival gear (which you may not need since you can still put a rank into Survival and take a feat to give you a bonus).
Negative.
The craft skill states it only costs 1/3 the cost in raw materials to craft an item, this applies even to mastercraft items. So, if the total cost of this armor is 170 gp, it would only cost a crafter 56 GP to purchase the raw materials and some time to do the crafting. It does not cost the crafter the full 170 GP to create said piece of armor.
You didn't read what I said then. This is a customized item and it's value is 170 gold. Yes, he would craft it for less, but the value of the item is what I am basing it on. Now, if his druid buddy wants to buy a suit like that, he's going to have to wait until next level when he has 1000 gold since he is going to have to have it commissioned.
So the ranger started off with a benefit that the druid didn't because the ranger invested. If the druid had invested, the value of the armor doesn't change so he would not be able to afford to begin play with it. However, he would be able to craft other things. The druid begins play with other advantages so he has much less money to spend on crafting.
At no point did I say that it would cost the character 170 gold. I said that the value of the armor is 170 gold, therefore it counts as 170 gold. If he decides that he wants to make this armor before he heads out (depending on the campaign, that may be possible), then the players need to understand that I will place (roughly) 114 less gold in the next few adventures to make up that value.
You didn't read what I said then. This is a customized item and it's value is 170 gold.
This is a custom item how? Isn't it just a standard item of a special material?
Isn't this, by RAW, available to anyone to buy at any time?
And do you mean Darkwood?
There are a lot of good feats and metamagic and such to conisder, and you can't Stack metamagic rods.Obviously it's all going to depend on the other feat (Craft Wondrous Item is only a 1 feat investment and Scribe Scroll is free). The character with that much more wealth is going to noticeably more powerful. It gets worse as he levels too. Especially if you do allow his craft feats to exceed the WBL. Since he can take more craft feats, he has far more versatility and power. Once he gets Craft Staff, you should see a pretty decent increase in power. Note that during the down time of crafting, he can be recharging the staffs that he had used.
I really dont see how this theoretical crafter is going to exceed the guy who can drop a quad-metamagicked spell or whatever other tricks he has access to because he has an ever increasing number of additional feats over the guy who keeps dropping his feats and time into expanding his potential wealth.
The examples you give, such as Staves, dont actually increase the Wielders power a significant degree; they add endurance, or options, and occasionally increase the wielders power a bit (IE, rods), but its not like the person with normal wealth loses out on these; they just have less of them, or slightly inferior versions of them (a +2 weapon vs. a +3, again for reference)
Staves allow you to use your caster's abilities instead of being limited to the magic item. That is a huge benefit.
As for the metamagic feats, the crafting wizard I mentioned only gave up a single feat. It's not a huge investment at all. He can still do nearly everything the other wizard can. If he wants to invest more crafting feats, he can find plenty of ways to increase his power far more than the metamagic wizard.
We're going to have to agree to disagree because I know that you and I don't play wizards the same way. I know that I don't play wizards like most people on the boards. My wizards are often off-the wall and nowhere near the norm. That's not a criticism of how you play. It's a difference in style. My wizards would probably get their asses handed to them in games outside of my group.
That's not how starting gold and crafting works. You get the starting amount of gold. You use your craft skill to purchase materials equaling 56 gp. That brings your remaining gold down to 144 gp to do with as you choose. Beginning wealth is not an assessment of the market value of your gear. It is the beginning number of coins with which you can work with. If you don't want this headache then simply do not allow your players to craft "before creation," as it were. If that's how "your campaign" works, awesome. However, it's not RAW.
You didn't read what I said then. This is a customized item and it's value is 170 gold.This is a custom item how? Isn't it just a standard item of a special material?
Isn't this, by RAW, available to anyone to buy at any time?
It's not "off-the-shelf." To me, it's just like anyone can have a sword that grants invisibility 3/day if they want to use the magic item creation guidelines.
When you walk into a smithy, you probably aren't going to find ironwood wooden armor just sitting on the wall. It's made of a Special Material, which makes it special.
Note that this is how I do things in my games. The easiest way to see if something is off-the-shelf is to see if it has a cost listed. If you have to calculate the cost, then it is no longer off-the-shelf. If you are starting with a higher level character, and magic items are an option, then you would look at what's listed in the book. Magic weapons and armor just have the table of +1 to +10 to look at. You pick the options you want and there you go.
|
|
I'm going to have to bow out of this thread. There are a lot of people talking past each-other in this thread and it's become obvious that neither side will convince the other.
My opinion is still that the benefit of crafting feats only makes sense either in the context of their in-game use, or in the context of granting extra wealth (if the usage occurred before the start of the campaign). Because of this, I allow someone to use their crafting to gain more gold worth of stuff at character creation. During the game, I let the chips fall where they may.
Piece out.
Note that this is how I do things in my games. The easiest way to see if something is off-the-shelf is to see if it has a cost listed. If you have to calculate the cost, then it is no longer off-the-shelf. If you are starting with a higher level character, and magic items are an option, then you would look at what's listed in the book. Magic weapons and armor just have the table of +1 to +10 to look at. You pick the options you want and there you go.
So its fiat; by RAW, everyone has access to Special Materials so long as they can afford them.
Right.
That's not how starting gold and crafting works. You get the starting amount of gold. You use your craft skill to purchase materials equaling 56 gp. That brings your remaining gold down to 144 gp to do with as you choose. Beginning wealth is not an assessment of the market value of your gear. It is the beginning number of coins with which you can work with. If you don't want this headache then simply do not allow your players to craft "before creation," as it were. If that's how "your campaign" works, awesome. However, it's not RAW.
Your wealth includes your gold. That's something I hope we can both agree on.
Nothing in the beginning wealth section says that you start with X gold. You can spend it any way you want as long as you can afford to. Obviously it isn't as clear cut as you want to claim because if it was, then the original poster wouldn't have asked the question about scrolls (there is no difference in the interpretation of the rules here, crafting is crafting is crafting). My method is consistent and not over or under-powered. It works and I have never had anyone find a way to game the system with my method. I have seen plenty of people game the system with other methods.
Note also that the book states "Starting Character Wealth lists the starting gold piece values by class." So it looks like it is a very reasonable way to interpret things. "Gold piece values." Note that's what I've been doing the entire time. Everything is based on value, not actual money spent.
This seems like a momentary advantage but is it consistent? What happens if the caster dies and ends up making a new one at 5th level? Do you apply the same ruling? What about if it happens at 15th level? What if it's not Scribing Scrolls but crafting a staff or wondrous item (something nor momentary)? I like things to be consistent and fair for my players and I don't want to have to continuously come up with a new rule for every level of play.
I too like for things to be consistent.
I have stated that I allow for crafters to benefit from their feats and skills, at all levels and even if created at a higher level than first.
I haven't yet had a player spend all their gold on an uber item.
I have seen crafters make a few staves that are group oriented, not just pure combat staves (ex: a staff with mount, hide campsite and endure elements).
In one campaign, because the players didn't feel right with the amount of mounts dying on them, the new crafter, as part of his RP way into the group, made several "Talisman of the Summoned Steed" (Taldor book), a figurine of wondrous power that turns into a horse, and if killed, reverts back to a statue. One talisman for each PC and the new crafter.
In another campaign, I have seen the extra wealth go toward purchasing an inn and sponsoring an orphanage.
I hardly think that those are overpowering or unbalancing the campaign.
Even if the crafter has a bit of extra wealth and spends it all on gear, I haven't seen it cause enormous problems - I have to modify the adventures for optimized PCs vs unoptimized ones, this is no worse.
This is where we start to run into the exact reason why I limit customization for starting items to what the individual character can make. If you take an Item Creation feat, you should get a benefit. Just like the wizard can't "borrow" the fighter's Toughness feat, the fighter can't "borrow" the wizard's Craft Wondrous Item feat.Allowing the crafter to craft custom items is very tangible. I don't see any need to set an arbitrary cap above what the system assumes just because a player spends a feat slot. Customization is incredibly tangible.Does this mean that a non-crafter cannot commission a custom magic item from a crafter?
After the start of the game, can a non-crafter order/commission a custom magic item?
If the answer is yes, then what is the point for anyone to take a crafting feat? - simply order what you need from a crafter and wait for it to be done (they will need the same amount of time to craft it as a crafting PC - and may be quicker as they will likely devote feats to it) and use the extra feat(s) for optimization. Also, to me, that nerfs or renders the crafting feats useless.
Your wealth includes your gold. That's something I hope we can both agree on.
Nothing in the beginning wealth section says that you start with X gold. You can spend it any way you want as long as you can afford to. Obviously it isn't as clear cut as you want to claim because if it was, then the original poster wouldn't have asked the question about scrolls (there is no difference in the interpretation of the rules here, crafting is crafting is crafting). My method is consistent and not over or under-powered. It works and I have never had anyone find a way to game the system with my method. I have seen plenty of people game the system with other methods.
Note also that the book states "Starting Character Wealth lists the starting gold piece values by class." So it looks like it is a very reasonable way to interpret things. "Gold piece values." Note that's what I've been doing the entire time. Everything is based on value, not actual money spent.
That's my agree to disagree point. The Wealth and Money section explicitly states you get a certain number of gold pieces that you can spend. This is a literal accounting of money to me, not a "total value of gear" measurement where you just "happen" to keep whatever you have remaining in GP on the character sheet. It's the same as me handing you 100 dollars and saying you have that to purchase your starting equipment. In the case of crafting I'm saying you can, if the GM allows time to do so, take that same 100 dollars, purchase raw materials instead, and you have the remaining amount after purchasing those materials to then be used elsewhere as you see fit. Just because you spend 50 dollars in materials, doesn't mean you automatically spend or lose an additional 25 since the "value" of what you're making is worth 75 dollars. You would still have 50 dollars with which to do with what you want.
|
|
Stuff.You're making a lot of inappropriate comparisons here.
First, I was making the assumption that, custom or not, people are buying their items without restriction. This only happens when you make characters above level 1, and is the ONLY case we're discussing. If you're saying that the benefit of the feat, at your table, is to force other players to stick with the explicitly listed items and allow the crafters to make weird items, that's an okay benefit I suppose. However, not all tables do this (myself included) because it implies that those items are somehow not available to be made for those characters by for-hire crafters, which seems unlikely.
Not true. Plenty of posts in this thread about doing that at level 1 too.
Second, you make the implication that being a couple levels ahead in wealth is equivalent to being a couple levels ahead as a character. This is not true in any way, shape or form. You do not get NEARLY as much benefit out of doubling wealth as you do those levels and to even compare the two is disingenuous at best, and deliberately deceitful at worst.
Really?
For 7.200 gp each (3.600 if I make them myself) I can have several items that give me +6 competence bonus to perception, stealth, spellcraft and so on.The equivalent of a feat for 7.200 gp.
+2 into a stat for 4.000 gp.
and so on
The effect decrease as the difference in wealth increase as a first level character with +5 gear is still no match for a 5th level character with character with normal gear, but a doubling of the gear make a character stronger than adding a level to him.
+25% as you suggest is not so noticeable but it make a difference. Gifting it to a new character that already has the advantage of picking and choosing what gear he want will make him stronger that most characters that have played from day one in the same campaign.
Fourth: The developers disagree with you that double wealth is an earth-shattering benefit. In the rise of the runelords AP there was a high level caster that had double the normal wealth (with no feat/ability expenditure of any form). The adjustment? +1 CR. That isn't a whole heck of a lot. Having someone spend a feat to get 1/10th that benefit does not seem farfetched. (Disclaimer: I'm working from memory as I'm not at home to look at my books for this.)
3.5
Pathfinder NPC with player level gear (i.e. x2 the normal 50% of player WBL that they normally get) have a +1 CR.
TL;DR - Please don't completely misrepresent/misunderstand...
Nice move. You always resort to this kin of tactic?
Note that this is how I do things in my games. The easiest way to see if something is off-the-shelf is to see if it has a cost listed. If you have to calculate the cost, then it is no longer off-the-shelf. If you are starting with a higher level character, and magic items are an option, then you would look at what's listed in the book. Magic weapons and armor just have the table of +1 to +10 to look at. You pick the options you want and there you go.So its fiat; by RAW, everyone has access to Special Materials so long as they can afford them.
Right.
I thought I made that clear pages ago.
This is the easiest way I found to keep the wealth roughly equal for all the characters but still allow the craft skills and feats to remain beneficial. It's easy to follow and understand. Everyone wins. No one ends up more powerful than anyone else just because they found ways to get more gear.
Keep in mind that there are other ways to reduce costs as well and these can add up quickly. Some traits reduce the cost by 5%. Making an item require specific skills, classes, races, etc, can also reduce the costs.
Also, if you are starting with extra gear based on the gold piece cost instead of the value, you have only paid a portion of the cost. You haven't paid the time portion of the cost. That was simply hand-waved away. Sometimes the time portion of the cost is easily dealt with, other times it can be a problem. I remember that my players wanted to craft 3 cloaks of major displacement. They realized that 150 days is a long time.
This is where we start to run into the exact reason why I limit customization for starting items to what the individual character can make. If you take an Item Creation feat, you should get a benefit. Just like the wizard can't "borrow" the fighter's Toughness feat, the fighter can't "borrow" the wizard's Craft Wondrous Item feat.Allowing the crafter to craft custom items is very tangible. I don't see any need to set an arbitrary cap above what the system assumes just because a player spends a feat slot. Customization is incredibly tangible.Does this mean that a non-crafter cannot commission a custom magic item from a crafter?After the start of the game, can a non-crafter order/commission a custom magic item?
If the answer is yes, then what is the point for anyone to take a crafting feat? - simply order what you need from a crafter and wait for it to be done (they will need the same amount of time to craft it as a crafting PC - and may be quicker as they will likely devote feats to it) and use the extra feat(s) for optimization. Also, to me, that nerfs or renders the crafting feats useless.
If you commission an item from an NPC, you pay full value for the item.
If you commission an item from a PC, you negotiate with that PC.
When all is said and done, as GM I look at the market value of the item. That's how I determine if you are where you need to be with regards to WBL.
If you want to commission a +1 longsword, go for it. If you want to commission a +1 longsword that also lets you turn invisible 3 times daily, go for it. You pay whatever you and the other character agree on. As GM, my issue isn't what you pay. It's what the item is worth.
Let me give a real world example. My friend is a sculptor. She is actually very good at what she does. I ask her to sculpt a dragon for me. Because she is my friend, she decides that she is only going to charge me $150. The materials cost her $100. If I choose to sell the sculpture, I can expect it to be worth $450. So if I put the sculpture on my insurance, I put the value of the sculpture, not the cost to me.
This is the easiest way I found to keep the wealth roughly equal for all the characters but still allow the craft skills and feats to remain beneficial.
You're making crafting valuable by removing a default option from all characters. Thats... not good.
The alternative, which is supported by the rules 100% in play, is that it provides a substantial discount on crafted items and allows you to convert other items into useful items, works just fine IMO, without any modification.
I agree there is little guidance as to how it should work before or otherwise outside of play, but upon examination, I dont think its neccesarily overpowering.
That's my agree to disagree point. The Wealth and Money section explicitly states you get a certain number of gold pieces that you can spend. This is a literal accounting of money to me, not a "total value of gear" measurement where you just "happen" to keep whatever you have remaining in GP on the character sheet. It's the same as me handing you 100 dollars and saying you have that to purchase your starting equipment. In the case of crafting I'm saying you can, if the GM allows time to do so, take that same 100 dollars, purchase raw materials instead, and you have the remaining amount after purchasing those materials to then be used elsewhere as you see fit. Just because you spend 50 dollars in materials, doesn't mean you automatically spend or lose an additional 25 since the "value" of what you're making is worth 75 dollars. You would still have 50 dollars with which to do with what you want.Your wealth includes your gold. That's something I hope we can both agree on.
Nothing in the beginning wealth section says that you start with X gold. You can spend it any way you want as long as you can afford to. Obviously it isn't as clear cut as you want to claim because if it was, then the original poster wouldn't have asked the question about scrolls (there is no difference in the interpretation of the rules here, crafting is crafting is crafting). My method is consistent and not over or under-powered. It works and I have never had anyone find a way to game the system with my method. I have seen plenty of people game the system with other methods.
Note also that the book states "Starting Character Wealth lists the starting gold piece values by class." So it looks like it is a very reasonable way to interpret things. "Gold piece values." Note that's what I've been doing the entire time. Everything is based on value, not actual money spent.
So you disagree with the portion that says it's a gold piece value? Fair enough.
I think you are under the impression that you would suffer in my games. I don't think so. I think you would not only do just fine, but you would find that you have better gear because it's exactly what you want instead of whatever happens to found. I think you would find that making unique items is much more rewarding than having to stick with what's in the books.
When I was playing 3.5, I used to think that I could exceed WBL. As a player, I searched for every way to squeeze every ounce out of every gold piece. I created spreadsheets and worked with another player to just blow it out of the water. What I found was that the GM eventually gave up because he had a harder time challenging us. I went back and reread the rules over and over. When I was GMing, I had the same player I had worked with before trying to do what we had done. I saw the GM's position and went back and reread things again. I realized that I was the one in the wrong, not the other GM.
Now that I am the primary GM for my group, I make sure that the players that have invested in their characters can still benefit. They don't get to increase their power. They get to adjust their power linearly. My games have been much more rewarding for it. I have a better group and more enjoyable games.
My players come to me often asking if they can have a custom item. I work with them on how much it costs and how they can accomplish it. They are happy with this and so am I. We all win.
This is the easiest way I found to keep the wealth roughly equal for all the characters but still allow the craft skills and feats to remain beneficial.You're making crafting valuable by removing a default option from all characters. Thats... not good.
The alternative, which is supported by the rules 100% in play, is that it provides a substantial discount on crafted items and allows you to convert other items into useful items, works just fine IMO, without any modification.
I agree there is little guidance as to how it should work before or otherwise outside of play, but upon examination, I dont think its neccesarily overpowering.
There is no default of the feats/skills increasing your wealth. That is an assumption by many, but it isn't the default.
I'm not doing anything different than allowing exactly what you are saying. The characters can craft what they want. They just can't exceed the WBL. They can sell off those ten +1 long swords they found and use that money to make something they want, at half price. So they sell the long swords for 23150 gold. They can then take that and make that Belt of Mighty Constitution +6 the barbarian wanted and have some left over for the Cloak of Resistance +3 that the wizard wanted and can still have money left over for scrolls and potions that they want.
The only thing I'm doing is making it so they can't have too much market value and that they can customize their gear if they choose.
|
|
What's to stop the player from doing that?A desire to play a more effective character for one?
Here's an example from something I'm currently working on; I'm remaking a 10th level Archer-Inquisitor for a campaign, and I've got 60k to spend (2k is set aside for party stuff). I already have covered the basics (+2 weapon, armor, stat belt, headband, cloak, boots of speed, lesser bracers of archery, etc.).
If I trade 2 feats for crafting to 'double my wealth' (Say, Manyshot and Deadly Aim, or Manyshot and Rapid Shot), what could I possibly buy to make up for the lost effectiveness? Doubling my investment in weapons and armor gets me at best a +1 to attack, damage, and AC. Doubling my wondrous items is worse; a +4 stat item is four times the cost of a +2, and things like bracers of archery/boots of speed dont double up just because I want to spend more cash there.
So my challenge is, please tell me, what can I buy with my double wealth that makes up for the loss of build-critical feats like Manyshot?
I really dont think Crafting Feats are notably better than other feats, even if they double your investments within their area of coverage, IMO. The benefit is really bigger early on, where they give you early access to cool things like Boots of Speed. But later? The next +1 on an item generally costs more than double what that first one did.
I may have to revise my earlier ruling in my campaign...
ORIGINAL TOPIC: I think a wizard should totally be allowed to craft with his starting allotment, and lead off with a few scrolls. It'll make life more fun at level 1 when he can improvise a few extra spells a day (albeit at relatively great financial cost to himself).
Quiver enchanted with abundant ammunitions so you will always have adamantine/silver/cold iron arrow for your bow at 0 cost (put enough arrows of each kind for one round of firing into the quiver and you are set for life). Cost: 2.000 gp
Make your bow +1 and holy. (-14.000 gp)
Your melee weapon adamantine and non magical (+5000)
Craft a wondrous item that cast enchant weapon 3 times day at CL 8.
Combined with the afore mentioned quiver you get +2 arrow for 16 hours/day and a +2 amadamantine weapon for 8 hours day plus a holy bow. Cost: 28.800
total cost 37.800
+6 perception lenses. cost 3.600 as they use a slot.
We are at 42.400 gp expended, 1 feat used (craft wondrous items): Worth delaying deadly aim I think.
I will make the note that Craft Wondrous is, at least to me, a wildly imbalanced feat just because of the variety of items it covers. No other magic item creation feat comes close to its utility. Just a thought.
I think this is something that we will definitely agree on. I think that it would be better balanced if all the item creation feats didn't use Spellcraft for the skill check. Instead, the alternative skill checks listed should be the default. Maybe impose a penalty if the caster chooses to use Spellcraft.
|
|
I will make the note that Craft Wondrous is, at least to me, a wildly imbalanced feat just because of the variety of items it covers. No other magic item creation feat comes close to its utility. Just a thought.I think this is something that we will definitely agree on. I think that it would be better balanced if all the item creation feats didn't use Spellcraft for the skill check. Instead, the alternative skill checks listed should be the default. Maybe impose a penalty if the caster chooses to use Spellcraft.
LOL
With all the disagreements between us I think we all feel that it is by far the stronger item creation feat.Even following Bob solution it would be easy for a high level intelligence based spellcaster to "game" it. 1 skill in the appropriate craft, skill enhancing magic item and he will easily get a 15+ total skill bonus.
Most intelligence based casters can afford spending 1 skill point at each level in crafting skills.
Quiver enchanted with abundant ammunitions so you will always have adamantine/silver/cold iron arrow for your bow at 0 cost (put enough arrows of each kind for one round of firing into the quiver and you are set for life). Cost: 2.000 gp
Convenient, but not a power increase. I can ignore all of these forms of DR at a trivial cost as a Inquisitor (cold iron arrows blanched silver, Judgement).
Make your bow +1 and holy. (-14.000 gp)
Cool and slightly more damaging, but I prefer +1 Seeking (net +2) to holy for now. Ignoring Mirror Image and all miss chances is IMO better than a conditional +2d6 damage. Ignoring a 25+% chance to deal no damage is better than an additional 7 vs. some targets. +2 Seeking would be better, but again is a luxury item; I dont need it to bypass DR (via Bane)so its only a +1 to hit and damage which I'll still get eventually.
Your melee weapon adamantine and non magical (+5000)
Craft a wondrous item that cast enchant weapon 3 times day at CL 8.
Combined with the afore mentioned quiver you get +2 arrow for 16 hours/day and a +2 amadamantine weapon for 8 hours day plus a holy bow.
I already plan to use the above... by expending a spell slot. This costs me 1 spell a day for my bow, and another for my melee weapon if it seems necessary. Craft Wondrous Items again would be convenient, but not an actual power increase.
+6 perception lenses. cost 3.600 as they use a slot.
These'd actually be cool. But at the same time, they're a luxury that doesn't really make me hugely better, and the reduced cost on them is kindof minor. I can get +4's for what, 1600? Less than half, for 66% effect? Good deal IMO.
We are at 42.400 gp expended, 1 feat used (craft wondrous items): Worth delaying deadly aim I think.
I can't imagine delaying deadly aim for the above; its a non-conditional, scaling bonus to damage. As I'm hitting CR appropriate foes something like 85% of the time with my attacks with it on, I feel like I'd be crazy to be without a free 4 damage a shot. Right now, holy is slightly better... but next level its a +6 non-conditional bonus to damage. Which is multiplied on crits. I'd be trading it for slightly early access to a few conveniences and quality of life upgrades that make things slightly better for me, without actually making me any better at my role.
Now I'll admit, Class and Build DO make a huge factor in this; But I think its pretty universally true that everyone needs as many feats as they can get (exceptions do apply); I also think they tend to make a bigger difference than a single step of gear does.
Remember, everyone eventually can afford their cool toys. Does it really matter in the grand scheme of things if the crafter gets them a level or two earlier? Especially if at the end of it, they lose out on a feat which could have made them better to begin with?
We're off topic though. I think its worth noting that in the case of wizards and scrolls, all you're really accomplishing by not letting them craft scrolls to start is to encourage them to hold onto their gold (or to buy trade goods... nothing like the wizard who starts with 3500 live chickens to sell in exchange for scroll making materials), and then spend a week crafting scrolls. Or you could just let him scribe them before the start of the game.
EDIT: Totally agree that Craft Wondrous is the 'best' crafting feat.
Wow, I leave for a day and over a hundred responses that I haven't read.
[ooc]Hey, Krispy, TOZ, and Stabbity - nice to know we're on similar-ish pages, as often!
(sorry if I missed anyone I talk to/see a lot)
Ooh, ooh, I was referenced! *goes to check it out*[/ooc]
It's also not RAW (note post 3 in this thread)
You mean mine? Where I said...
It depends heavily on the social contract and expectations of the group itself. I'd probably allow it, but many might not. It's entirely up to the group and what they're comfortable with.
...?
'Cause I'm honored if you think so, but I'm totally not a dev or anyone official (though I'd desperately like to be! ).
That said I still totally stand by that.
It's entirely fine with me if my characters use what they have. Only one of my players ever tried to be greedy/silly. I allowed it. He quickly learned about what follows in a campaign and never attempted again.
If a guy has a character concept that allows him to build magic items at first level, I'd be all about that. It's cool with me.
If a guy in a group has a character concept that allows him to build magic items at first level, and their GM doesn't like that: it's also cool with me.
A 5th level starting party all want to pool their resources to the Crafter Guys can do their magic and triple the wealth? More power to them! Time for a lot of effectively worthless (or plot) wealth and/or in-game reasons that require them to give stuff away (unless you want them to have more)! That made things easy for me... I don't have to worry about Christmas shopping and shoehorning in "good" items where they wouldn't fit. (Unless I want to do that, and am okay with them being extra wealthy!)
An 11th Level Starting party? Same deal!
A fifteenth level starting party? Dudes, why not?! They're fifteenth level! The AP is practically over!
* (I'm not actually calling anyone a slacker, and yes, Diego, we've been over this!)
A twentieth? C'mon! It's twentieth level. It doesn't matter any more.
But see, my arguments are great... for my game. I like giving not just vague utility, but great utility to non-combat/non-emergency skills.
This all totally depends on the local social contract.
Let me repeat that: .
You're a GM and your players greedy and power gamers? Well, your response depends entirely on whether or not you're okay with that. If you're not, be harsh. If you are, be lenient. If you're somewhere in the middle, be somewhere in the middle. You're a player? Ask your GM. This isn't really a game where the GMs and players are out to make each other "fail" (unless your social contract says that it is and you're having fun with that dynamic) - it's a cooperative story telling experience. Each group tells their story in a different way.
I mean, really: arguing about what's right or wrong for someone else's group? Now that's kind of silly.
That said, while I would generally allow it, I do like some of the story reasons on both sides of the issue - why some tables explain it away and why some tables allow its use. Nice stuff, all round, I must say.
Oh. ALSO! (actually back to the main topic)
Scribe Scroll: awesome, more one-time iterations of the spells I have!
Pay for scrolls: awesome, a larger variety of spells to choose from!
Either way, I think it's fine. The OP has decided not to do it. Cool.
EDIT: attempting and failing to get the ooc tags to work right.
So you disagree with the portion that says it's a gold piece value? Fair enough.
I think you are under the...
I'm under the impression that crafting in your campaigns isn't really gaining your characters anything. If you charge the full value of an item again the WBL level and adjust accordingly, I gain nothing by investing time in crafting. I might be able to get something slightly quicker but I may as well save my GP and commission craft or simply buy my gear at full market cost since the net result is the same. Crafting isn't really a shortcut because to create the really unbalancing items in the books, it will take a high level character with a lot of time. I've never been in a campaign where the characters gets entire months worth of downtime. There's always something going on. That's limited to my experience, but still, it wouldn't be breaking. I see crafting as a means to exceed WBL because, according to how the skill and feats are written, I can escape the feeling that's how they were designed. The trade off, again, is time. You get to basically spend only 1/3 or 1/2 an items cost and spend time to create the full thing you're wanting to acquire. Over the course of years, you should have more and better quality gear than those that have left their equipment selection to happenstance by way of dungeon crawls, merchants and "award givers."
You keep focusing on that one part of that sentence and excluding the rest...
When someone says something doesn't say something when in fact it does verbatim? Yes. You get a number of gold pieces to spend on your gear. I'm not saying precrafting is supported by RAW. There is no where in the CRB that says you can start play with items you've crafted yourself. However, if you begin play with crafting feats and you want to ask your GM if you can craft some of your beginning gear that's awesome. Then, you should only be bound by the amount of time the GM grants you. When doing this though, the WBL is a guideline and not a rule and I don't think a crafted items full market value should count against future treasure you get.
This simply stinks of a fake world to me and not one that my character really has any impact upon because, if I can change what's in a treasure horde simply because of what I have on me, then, in essence, I'm more powerful than the GM which should not be. If the GM does their job right I'll never know. But, as soon as I get wind they're changing loot piles because I have better gear than I "should" have to keep some mystical table happy, that will ruin a bit of the experience for me. Having an item's full market value weighed in the balance essentially remove a large part of the incentive to take the feats. It's really no different than treating a caster who has a lot of metamagic feats as a higher level caster and therefore they don't need as much assistance. Or, and I've seen this one around lately, having an optimized fighter and the encounters being ratched up just to challenge me or being asked/forced to not optimize for a few levels to make the GM happy. That sort of reactionary play simply breaks immersion. If my Wizard takes the last few hundred gold he has to create some scrolls for the next dungeon and, whether he uses them or not, and that effects the loot within the dungeon that's just breaking the game for me.
I ask this: If the gold pieces received are not limited in their usage, why are limits stated?
There are no limits. It's perfectly reasonable to say that a crafters equipment costs are lower because he made his own stuff. You're looking at equipment meaning what's already in the book at full value. Crafters have more options than that. They can simply buy raw materials and create the end product themselves.
The entire concept of having crafted items at creation is in no wise a RAW debate. RAW, it doesn't happen. RAW sets up the constructs to allow it to happen and doesn't say it can't happen. However, there is no specific provision for a character with crafting abilities to craft a certain portion of their starting equipment. It is only possible if the GM allows you to spend time prior to the first session. It makes roleplay sense because you had to acquire the skill somewhere. If the GM consents, it is possible given the rules because then you have the time, gp and skill to create the item. If the GM doesn't consent it's not going to happen.
To use the "it's not allowed by WBL" argument is a fallacy if for no other reason then the rich parents trait. At first level this puts the "average" first level character 9x above the available wealth of their peers. Granted, this levels out over a 20 level career. However, the precedent exists regardless. WBL is simply a guideline and not a rule as Paizo provides a clear-cut way to shatter such a rule immediately at level 1. To say that all characters across all campaigns are supposed to stay at the same rate of advancement determined by the value of their gear is patently false otherwise that trait would not exist under any circumstances.
That said, the rules state you get a specific amount of money. The crafting rules state you can craft something by purchasing raw materials at 1/3 the cost of a mundane item. Thus, if a GM allows character creation to include items you crafted and you have sufficient time to do the crafting, you should only be charged the materials cost and you keep the remaining gp to spend toward other items. All this is in the line with the rules if the GM allows you to have time prior to character creation. However, being "charged" full market value for an item, which you are if you can only spend 50 gp after crafting an item worth 150 gp if you have a 200 gp starting allotment regardless of the actual material cost to craft the item, is not supported in the rules and it's not even in the sections surrounding wealth by level. That is a GM created construct to give the illusion that character are actually crafting their equipment when they really aren't.
All they are really doing is purchasing their items at the normal rate and going through extra hoops to do so which is dumb. The crafting rules let you create items with a mixture of time and gp and less gp than the full value of the item in question. If not, there would only be markets and not smiths or tanners in the game world. If you let your characters use time before the first session toward crafting, you are only doing them a disservice by effectively charging them for the full value of the items. You have effectively killed crafting and are only allowing them to buy items in the normal manner and have just wasted their time and your own.
If you are truly uncomfortable with allowing your characters to spend 1/3 of the gold to purchase materials with which to craft and letting them spend the the rest of their starting cash at the rate of [starting cash] - [materials cost only] then simply do not let them believe they crafted their items prior to character creation. If you need a roleplay point for their crafting then say the apprenticed under a similar crafter. However, you should be willing to deal with these consequences as well. Did that apprenticeship go well or did it not? If it did, that character has an in with a more experienced crafter and should be entitled to gains from that type of relationship. The same applies if it ended badly. However, to say they "crafted" their gear only to charge them for the full value of the gear anyway is dishonest to a very large degree.
You keep focusing on that one part of that sentence and excluding the rest...
Try changing the bold portion thusly
Each character begins play with [bold]a number of gold pieces that he can spend on weapons, armor, and other equipment.You see how that is different?
I ask this: If the gold pieces received are not limited in their usage, why are limits stated? Why doesn't the passage read "Each character begins play with a number of gold pieces," or "Each character begins play with a number of gold pieces they may spend however they wish,"?
I have to assume that the author did not artificially pad the word count, since in book that is already going to be overly-large like Pathfinder is you would actually expect attempts to shorten unnecessarily verbose passages. That assumption leads to the conclusion that "...that he can spend on weapons, armor, and other equipment," is there for a reason - that reason being clearly worded limitation of what starting wealth may be used for, even if the particular details of that limitation were unintentional.
It says can, not must. Furthermore you can purchase trade good and trade them directly back for gold after the game starts so that makes the idea of mandatory wealth use as a limiter pretty much completely pointless.
Now if you want you can use this as an excuse to exclude crafting beforehand. You can do so, but there is no reason they can't hold onto their money and then just stall at the beginning of the game to do their crafting.
Also are you telling me you have never floated any of the gold from your creation in order to cover potential needs later in the game?
It's not always that simple. Many of us like to get the characters involved in the adventure as quickly as possible. I know that I don't generally start adventures with enough exposition to allow for a lot of crafting. When we start gaming, it's time to game. I do allow time for crafting, during down time. The players don't dictate when that is. I do. I'm not trying to be a dick to my players but once I start the adventure, it's time to game. My players know how I run things with starting wealth and crafting. They come to me weeks in advance and we discuss things so that when it's time to game, we can game. I hate shopping adventures and I won't run them. Crafting instead of adventuring is the same thing.
I should probably note that I don't force anyone to spend all their starting gold. I remember that this was a rule in one system I was in, I can't remember which one, and it pissed me off to no end. There are often expenses that you need actual cash for (bribes, taxes, food and lodging, unforeseen gear, healing, etc).
...Okay, now explain how those are limits and not examples. And explain why I can't buy silver bars with it.
Forget silver bars, your average Wizard can buy 3500 chickens! If you're going to make a point, you may as well make a mess to boot.
Because anyone who says you can't carry money into the game at character creation is playing a game I've never seen played.
The entire concept of having crafted items at creation is in no wise a RAW debate. RAW, it doesn't happen. RAW sets up the constructs to allow it to happen and doesn't say it can't happen.
This is something I really wish we would see the developers speak on at some point. It has been an issue for more than a decade and should be talked about at some point.
To use the "it's not allowed by WBL" argument is a fallacy if for no other reason then the rich parents trait. At first level this puts the "average" first level character 9x above the available wealth of their peers. Granted, this levels out over a 20 level career. However, the precedent exists regardless. WBL is simply a guideline and not a rule as Paizo provides a clear-cut way to shatter such a rule immediately at level 1. To say that all characters across all campaigns are supposed to stay at the same rate of advancement determined by the value of their gear is patently false otherwise that trait would not exist under any circumstances.
900 gold is less than a 2nd level character should have in wealth so it is still within the WBL guidelines. Note that the GM, if using the WBL guidelines, should reduce the amount of stuff acquired during adventuring.
That said, the rules state you get a specific amount of money. The crafting rules state you can craft something by purchasing raw materials at 1/3 the cost of a mundane item. Thus, if a GM allows character creation to include items you crafted and you have sufficient time to do the crafting, you should only be charged the materials cost and you keep the remaining gp to spend toward other items. All this is in the line with the rules if the GM allows you to have time prior to character creation. However, being "charged" full market value for an item, which you are if you can only spend 50 gp after crafting an item worth 150 gp if you have a 200 gp starting allotment regardless of the actual material cost to craft the item, is not supported in the rules and it's not even in the sections surrounding wealth by level. That is a GM created construct to give the illusion that character are actually crafting their equipment when they really aren't.
I showed where it is supported by the rules. You can ignore that all you want, but it clearly is there when it discusses what you can spend your wealth on. I quoted it several times. All characters are expected to have roughly equal wealth. Wealth isn't about what you spent. It's about the value of the item(s). That's why they have a Market Value. This is so you can figure out what something is worth.
How would you figure out how much raw material was spent on crafting a suit of masterwork chainmail by a character with a +4 to his Craft Armor skill? Do you really think the authors intended on you creating spreadsheets to account for the times when you fail your check by 5 or more? We can figure out the averages if we want, but then what's the point? You could have rolled really well or really crappy too. But your method doesn't account for that. What if your character starts with a +8 in Craft (Armor) and decides that his character likes to push himself and wants to craft it faster because the GM says you only have 1 month of craft time and you want to also make a sword (your character also has a +8 to Craft Weapons). How would you calculate all this? It gets to be far more effort than it's worth.
All they are really doing is purchasing their items at the normal rate and going through extra hoops to do so which is dumb. The crafting rules let you create items with a mixture of time and gp and less gp than the full value of the item in question. If not, there would only be markets and not smiths or tanners in the game world. If you let your characters use time before the first session toward crafting, you are only doing them a disservice by effectively charging them for the full value of the items. You have effectively killed crafting and are only allowing them to buy items in the normal manner and have just wasted their time and your own.
I also have showed how it does not kill, or even injure, crafting in any way shape or form. It allows for those who invest in crafting to get creative and applies equally to all levels of play. Instead of having one set of rules for level 1 and another for higher levels, and then having to put caps on how much you can spend your wealth on crafting.
There are actually no hoops to jump through. If you want to benefit from your crafting abilities, then you tell me what you want to craft before the game starts and I allow it. No rolls necessary. The other method should involve all kinds of rolls, which seems rather tedious.
If you are truly uncomfortable with allowing your characters to spend 1/3 of the gold to purchase materials with which to craft and letting them spend the the rest of their starting cash at the rate of [starting cash] - [materials cost only] then simply do not let them believe they crafted their items prior to character creation. If you need a roleplay point for their crafting then say the apprenticed under a similar crafter. However, you should be willing to deal with these consequences as well. Did that apprenticeship go well or did it not? If it did, that character has an in with a more experienced crafter and should be entitled to gains from that type of relationship. The same applies if it ended badly. However, to say they "crafted" their gear only to charge them for the full value of the gear anyway is dishonest to a very large degree.
I don't see how putting an arbitrary limit on time makes things easier, especially with the skills. Sure, with the feats it's more cut and dry, but the skills can vary a lot. It seems that you would have to start making other rules or taking more time during character creation just to be able to make sure the character gets a fair shake.
I like simplicity and consistency. My understanding of the rules on wealth allow for that. It's clean and quick. It still grants a benefit to the starting characters that invest in the skills or feats and I can apply it equally to all characters at all levels of play.
900 gold is less than a 2nd level character should have in wealth so it is still within the WBL guidelines. Note that the GM, if using the WBL guidelines, should reduce the amount of stuff acquired during adventuring.
By 100 gold, grats. Take care. I'll revisit in the morning.
900 gold is less than a 2nd level character should have in wealth so it is still within the WBL guidelines. Note that the GM, if using the WBL guidelines, should reduce the amount of stuff acquired during adventuring.
As I said, this is only 100 gold less than the WBL for level 2. That's only a difference of 10 percent. Are you saying that a level 19 character with 792,000 gp (again, 10 percent shy of the level 20 WBL number) worth of items is fine? I would hardly think you would be okay with this.
I showed where it is supported by the rules. You can ignore that all you want, but it clearly is there when it discusses what you can spend your wealth on. I quoted it several times. All characters are expected to have roughly equal wealth. Wealth isn't about what you spent. It's about the value of the item(s). That's why they have a Market Value. This is so you can figure out what something is worth.
How would you figure out how much raw material was spent on crafting a suit of masterwork chainmail by a character with a +4 to his Craft Armor skill? Do you really think the authors intended on you creating spreadsheets to account for the times when you fail your check by 5 or more? We can figure out the averages if we want, but then what's the point? You could have rolled really well or really crappy too. But your method doesn't account for that. What if your character starts with a +8 in Craft (Armor) and decides that his character likes to push himself and wants to craft it faster because the GM says you only have 1 month of craft time and you want to also make a sword (your character also has a +8 to Craft Weapons). How would you calculate all this? It gets to be far more effort than it's worth.
The taking 10 mechanic is a very fair way to judge what a character "auto create." Use that to base your calculations on. It's reliable, consistent and is completely valid. If a character can't take 10 to craft an item and do it successfully then, to me, they shouldn't be allowed to craft that item prior to character creation, because, as you mentioned, it can get tedious. Also, if the player wants to sit down and do the rolls with the GM and the GM is okay with this that will work too deducting extra GP where failures occur.
I also have showed how it does not kill, or even injure, crafting in any way shape or form. It allows for those who invest in crafting to get creative and applies equally to all levels of play. Instead of having one set of rules for level 1 and another for higher levels, and then having to put caps on how much you can spend your wealth on crafting.
There are actually no hoops to jump through. If you want to benefit from your crafting abilities, then you tell me what you want to craft before the game starts and I allow it. No rolls necessary. The other method should involve all kinds of rolls, which seems rather tedious.
It does injure crafting. Crafting states I can make the same item you can buy at a fraction of the cost with the only trade off being I have to put time into my item and you buying it is a 2 minute transaction. If you take away that incentive of actually creating something then crafting is useless. The hoops you make people jump through is 1) by giving the impression they are actually crafting something when in effect they are not, 2) they have to seek your approval to "craft" said item which can open them to all sorts of conditions per your whim, 3) regardless of the actual craft mechanic you are still holding them accountable for the full market value of the item rather than the cost of the materials which is the base difference in crafting versus buying an item. Again, simply use take 10 for the rolls. It represents what the character can do on average and is a fair indicator of their given skill in a particular area. It's really not that bad.
I don't see how putting an arbitrary limit on time makes things easier, especially with the skills. Sure, with the feats it's more cut and dry, but the skills can vary a lot. It seems that you would have to start making other rules or taking more time during character creation just to be able to make sure the character gets a fair shake.
I like simplicity and consistency. My understanding of the rules on wealth allow for that. It's clean and quick. It still grants a benefit to the starting characters that invest in the skills or feats and I can apply it equally to all characters at all levels of play.
Your players are receiving zero benefit from investing their skill ranks/feats in crafting. If someone comes to you and says "I want to make x" and you say "fine! now let me add the full value of that item toward your WBL" that character may as well commission or simply buy the item outright since the end result is the same since you stated that a character crafts an item who's market value is 500 gp, for example, then on a level 2 WBL they only have 500 gp left to spend. This is patently false for crafting since I only need to invest 1/3 or 1/2 that number on materials in order to utilize the crafting skill/feats. All one of your characters need to do to circumvent that entire process is to go through the equipment sections, figure up any special material or masterwork costs and say they purchased it. What did that person gain or lose by purchasing that item? Nothing. What did the person who invested in crafting gain? Nothing. But, they did lose out on time spent going over their intentions with you and conforming to any constraints or conditions you may feel appropriate and the perception they actually crafted it. Regardless of your ruling on if they crafted it or not the end result is the same as the person who went to a store a bought the item at full price. If you really want to give your players a benefit then tell them to simply not invest in crafting, at all, and let them take other feats and invest those skill ranks so they can put them to use in areas where you haven't hamstrung the game.
Your desire for "simplicity and consistency" has overridden the game entirely in this regard. It is your job as GM to perform a certain amount of due diligence in working with your players in creating their characters to work through the ins and outs not only so they work in your campaign but also so you understand the party and know what they're capable of and not capable of. Working through these scenarios and abilities is part of that due diligence.
Also...
To me it seems the issue everyone is having is with players exploiting, and truely the onus will fall on the player to try to keep things within reason. As it stands with craft feats there are level restrictions and as such the amount of wealth from the WBL chart would not grant the full amount, only the amount gained from the level the feat could be attained or when the character took the feat (ie. craft armor is level 5 but not always taken at level 5). For a level 1 wizard having scribe scroll, you gain 2d6x10 starting gold, average 70gp, which after you buy your backpack, sleepingbag/blankets, rations, waterskins, etc... you'll have maybe 40gp. With this 40gp you then make 3x 1st level scrolls (12.5gp x 3 = 37.5gp), leaving you with 2.5gp for stabling your horse and paying your rent at the inn until you start looting monsters. Even with the Rich Parents trait (900gp starting wealth) which would allow for the creation of an abundance of scrolls it only allows your weak wizards to be a little more endurant with spell options. If said player wishes to waste all of his money in this regard, as a DM you could always have the local thieve's guild relieve him of his burdens. Also take into account that if the wizard doesn't have the spell to be scribed he cannot create it as it's a spell completion item.
This.
Furthermore:
Different character types might spend their wealth differently than these percentages suggest; for example, arcane casters might spend very little on weapons but a great deal more on other magic items and disposable items.
That's in the same section as the WBL chart. This can very well be used to say crafters would use part of their WBL to purchase crafting materials with which to make their items. The cost for those materials would only be 1/3 or 1/2 the market price of the crafted items per the crafting rules. The only restriction then is to set a limit on how much time said character would have to actually craft and THAT is up to you, the GM.
As I said, this is only 100 gold less than the WBL for level 2. That's only a difference of 10 percent. Are you saying that a level 19 character with 792,000 gp (again, 10 percent shy of the level 20 WBL number) worth of items is fine? I would hardly think you would be okay with this.
Actually it is just fine for many reasons, first because the character doesn’t have the wealth of a character of a higher level. Second, because as I have said many times now, as GM I will reduce the amount of treasure the party finds so that when they reach 2nd level, they have roughly 1,000 gold. Not exactly, but roughly.
The taking 10 mechanic is a very fair way to judge what a character "auto create." Use that to base your calculations on. It's reliable, consistent and is completely valid. If a character can't take 10 to craft an item and do it successfully then, to me, they shouldn't be allowed to craft that item prior to character creation, because, as you mentioned, it can get tedious. Also, if the player wants to sit down and do the rolls with the GM and the GM is okay with this that will work too deducting extra GP where failures occur.
Why force the player into the Take 10 mechanic? What if they want to roll the dice to see if they can craft faster and possibly get more gear? Why would you want to place such limits on them when they invested their skills and possibly feats into this? That seems like an arbitrary decision that could be stifling the character. Especially if the player feels lucky and wants to take his chances.
It does injure crafting. Crafting states I can make the same item you can buy at a fraction of the cost with the only trade off being I have to put time into my item and you buying it is a 2 minute transaction. If you take away that incentive of actually creating something then crafting is useless. The hoops you make people jump through is 1) by giving the impression they are actually crafting something when in effect they are not, 2) they have to seek your approval to "craft" said item which can open them to all sorts of conditions per your whim, 3) regardless of the actual craft mechanic you are still holding them accountable for the full market value of the item rather than the cost of the materials which is the base difference in crafting versus buying an item. Again, simply use take 10 for the rolls. It represents what the character can do on average and is a fair indicator of their given skill in a particular area. It's really not that bad.
I’m sorry you are unable to see how making your own, specialized, gear is not a benefit. There is no difference in crafting the suit of armor I mentioned earlier other than I say it’s value is what’s important. There are no additional hoops. I’m not sure why you keep saying that there are unless you are just not willing to see what I have actually written. As for holding them accountable to the market value, that is the assumption in the rules. Should I post it again for you? I can if you missed it. The rules don’t say “Everyone has roughly equal value of gear unless they invested in feats and skills that can potentially double their gear. But don’t worry about that because it will have no impact on your game because the wealth a character has isn’t really all that relevent anyway.” They instead say that all characters have roughly the same wealth at the same level of play. The only fair way to accomplish this is to use the market value. Using any other value does not make it “roughly equal” anymore.
Your understanding of the rules is a farce then,
I have not once insulted you, please show me the same courtesy. I have been running games since 1980 and very successfully I might add.
Your players are receiving zero benefit from investing their skill ranks/feats in crafting. If someone comes to you and says "I want to make x" and you say "fine! now let me add the full value of that item toward your WBL" that character may as well commission or simply buy the item outright since the end result is the same since you stated that a character crafts an item who's market value is 500 gp, for example, then on a level 2 WBL they only have 500 gp left to spend. This is patently false for crafting since I only need to invest 1/3 or 1/2 that number on materials in order to utilize the crafting skill/feats. All one of your characters need to do to circumvent that entire process is to go through the equipment sections, figure up any special material or masterwork costs and say they purchased it. What did that person gain or lose by purchasing that item? Nothing. What did the person who invested in crafting gain? Nothing. But, they did lose out on time spent going over their intentions with you and conforming to any constraints or conditions you may feel appropriate and the perception they actually crafted it. Regardless of your ruling on if they crafted it or not the end result is the same as the person who went to a store a bought the item at full price.
You and I have very different definitions of the word “benefit.” The way I use it is that something provides a positive attribute to the character. Customization is a clear benefit.
Also, you may need more than 1/3 the raw materials to craft your starting gear if you roll crappy enough. Why should the guy with 0 ranks in craft armor get the same benefit as the guy who invested a rank, higher intelligence, a feat, a trait, and is a gnome? Remember that craft can be used untrained.
Your desire for "simplicity and consistency" has overridden the game entirely in this regard.
You really should try my method and see how simply and consistent it really is. Then apply your method, but make sure that the players who invest more can benefit more. The starting character with +10 to his Craft Weapons skill should get more out of crafting than the character with no investment and a 7 Intelligence and no artisan’s tools (essentially having a -3 to his check).
Gamemastering wrote:
Different character types might spend their wealth differently than these percentages suggest; for example, arcane casters might spend very little on weapons but a great deal more on other magic items and disposable items.
That's in the same section as the WBL chart. This can very well be used to say crafters would use part of their WBL to purchase crafting materials with which to make their items. The cost for those materials would only be 1/3 or 1/2 the market price of the crafted items per the crafting rules.
I addressed this a while ago. You can spend your money as you see fit, and the percentages listed are an general expectation but not carved in stone. Obviously a wizard isn’t going to spend much money on armor and weapons and a fighter is probably not going to spend a lot on consumables. The point is that they should divide their wealth into categories so that they don’t put all their eggs in one basket. Also, nothing, not a single thing mentioned anywhere in any of the books, even comes close to suggesting that you should see a large increase in your wealthy just because you have a feat. It has been explained many times by many people why it works this way. Maybe you should create a character with an exhorbitant amount of wealth and compare him to a character of appropriate wealth for his level and see which one is noticeably more powerful. Play in a game where this happens and you will see, very clearly, why the WBL is about Market Value and not craft value, which can change depending on feats, skills, racial abilities, and traits.
Even an caster with both traits is limited to a few extra L1 spell scrolls or potions. Not that big a deal.
Actually, 900 gold is 72 self scribed scrolls. If they also have the trait that reduces the cost of crafting by 5%, then we are looking at 75 scrolls. You can easily take 1/3 of that money, buy a bunch of other spells you can cast, and still scribe 30+ scrolls. Not having a limitation on how many spells you can cast per day is significant and improves your chances of survival greatly.
Actually it is just fine for many reasons, first because the character doesn’t have the wealth of a character of a higher level. Second, because as I have said many times now, as GM I will reduce the amount of treasure the party finds so that when they reach 2nd level, they have roughly 1,000 gold. Not exactly, but roughly.
I hate that play style. Don't gimp the treasure simply because of what I have. Mind you, what I have is ultimately determined by you. So, if you find yourself gimping treasure awards frequently then I would say you built or have managed a campaign incorrectly.
Why force the player into the Take 10 mechanic? What if they want to roll the dice to see if they can craft faster and possibly get more gear? Why would you want to place such limits on them when they invested their skills and possibly feats into this? That seems like an arbitrary decision that could be stifling the character. Especially if the player feels lucky and wants to take his chances.
"Forcing" them to take 10 is exactly the sort of mechanic a GM needs to make quicker decisions. It's a completely legitimate way to play your character and even states that you can take 10 to avoid the randomness of the die. If the player wants to roll, I do believe I said that should be fine if the GM was cool with it.
I’m sorry you are unable to see how making your own, specialized, gear is not a benefit. There is no difference in crafting the suit of armor I mentioned earlier other than I say it’s value is what’s important. There are no additional hoops. I’m not sure why you keep saying that there are unless you are just not willing to see what I have actually written. As for holding them accountable to the market value, that is the assumption in the rules. Should I post it again for you? I can if you missed it. The rules don’t say “Everyone has roughly equal value of gear unless they invested in feats and skills that can potentially double their gear. But don’t worry about that because it will have no impact on your game because the wealth a character has isn’t really all that relevent anyway.” They instead say that all characters have roughly the same wealth at the same level of play. The only fair way to accomplish this is to use the market value. Using any other value does not make it “roughly equal” anymore.
No, the rules do say that at a particular level I have roughly a certain amount of GP to spend as I wish. If that includes materials for crafting that is perfectly valid. Crafters should have more perceived wealth just as melee specialists should be able to pwn face in ways a crafting oriented character can't.
I have not once insulted you, please show me the same courtesy. I have been running games since 1980 and very successfully I might add.
Yeah, I removed it from the post. You may not be able to believe it but it really wasn't meant a dig at you, per se, just your take on the rules. So, I apologize.
You and I have very different definitions of the word “benefit.” The way I use it is that something provides a positive attribute to the character. Customization is a clear benefit.
Also, you may need more than 1/3 the raw materials to craft your starting gear if you roll crappy enough. Why should the guy with 0 ranks in craft armor get the same benefit as the guy who invested a rank, higher intelligence, a feat, a trait, and is a gnome? Remember that craft can be used untrained.
He won't have the same benefit. However, he could if he used the roll-always method your prescribed earlier if the crafter is rolling bad but the non-crafter is rolling well. This is another place where take 10 would be the default method, I would think. It let's know automatically if you succeed your minimum DC to actually create something and is a safe way to judge if a character did actually craft something.
You really should try my method and see how simply and consistent it really is. Then apply your method, but make sure that the players who invest more can benefit more. The starting character with +10 to his Craft Weapons skill should get more out of crafting than the character with no investment and a 7 Intelligence and no artisan’s tools (essentially having a -3 to his check).
The existing rules already allot for this. A crafting oriented character should have spent time crafting and thus his average skill result for craft checks would be much higher. This would directly impact the sort of item he can even attempt, give a good indicator of the items he can reasonably expect to craft, etc. The rules in the book allow for this as is. I don't see why I would have to do anything extraordinary using the rules as written to make sure the crafter benefits more from crafting than the non-crafter.
I addressed this a while ago. You can spend your money as you see fit, and the percentages listed are an general expectation but not carved in stone. Obviously a wizard isn’t going to spend much money on armor and weapons and a fighter is probably not going to spend a lot on consumables. The point is that they should divide their wealth into categories so that they don’t put all their eggs in one basket. Also, nothing, not a single thing mentioned anywhere in any of the books, even comes close to suggesting that you should see a large increase in your wealthy just because you have a feat. It has been explained many times by many people why it works this way. Maybe you should create a character with an exhorbitant amount of wealth and compare him to a character of appropriate wealth for his level and see which one is noticeably more powerful. Play in a game where this happens and you will see, very clearly, why the WBL is about Market Value and not craft value, which can change depending on feats, skills, racial abilities, and traits.
Of course it's not by craft value. It's the general number to be used in most cases in a standard fantasy game. However, the benefit should be afforded to players who invested in those feats and skills. Similarly, those same character won't be as proficient in other areas such as spell casting or fighting. That is the trade off one makes in choosing feats and skills. You almost make it sound a player taking crafting is basically having the world handed to them per RAW but that's simply not the case. There is a lot of time involved and there is only the assumption that you should be able to create something if you meet the prereqs of the item. To quote a dev:
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz1tlu?Magic-Item-Creation-and-Caster-Level#17
That is intentional--as long as they're picking items for which they meet all the prereqs, they should have no chance of failure.
That's a reason I defaulted to saying use take 10. It's not bootstrapping a character by any means. It's simply the standard with which a character can reasonably expect success.