Note that I already understand that not all feats are created equal. However, I can't find any feats that actually would increase your character's effective character level.
There are none.
Ta-Da, trick question answered!
But wait, thats not what Item Crafting Feats do, even in the worse case; they increase one aspect of character level, wealth!
In which case, I present to you..... WEAPON FOCUS, The Feat Which Increases Attack Bonus By the Same As a Fighter Level!
As well as IRON WILL, Which Increases Will Saves Much As a Level in Oracle!
Both of which provide an increase to one area of character stuff equivalent to a levels progression.
Note, I dont think I mentioned character level, I mentioned CR. Those are different.
Note that I already understand that not all feats are created equal. However, I can't find any feats that actually would increase your character's effective character level.There are none.
Ta-Da, trick question answered!
But wait, thats not what Item Crafting Feats do, even in the worse case; they increase one aspect of character level, wealth!
In which case, I present to you..... WEAPON FOCUS, The Feat Which Increases Attack Bonus By the Same As a Fighter Level!
As well as IRON WILL, Which Increases Will Saves Much As a Level in Oracle!
Both of which provide an increase to one area of character stuff equivalent to a levels progression.
Note, I dont think I mentioned character level, I mentioned CR. Those are different.
I'm not sure how you can make the claim that an increase in your expected WBL by enough to be 1-2 levels higher is the same as Weapon Focus or Iron Will.
It should be noted that weapon focus doesn't actually give you a higher base attack. That would certainly make it much more powerful as you would qualify for iterative attacks and some feats sooner.
Also, comparing two feats to what someone could get with 1 level of multiclassing isn't the same as a single feat increasing your wealth by 1-2 levels. With multiclassing, you are also getting a penalty of losing out on your current class's abilities.
As I mentioned before, build a character with appropriate WBL and one with appropriate WBL 1 level higher and then 2 levels higher. See if there are any noticeable differences in power. Now do this for a party of 4 and see what happens to their power. A feat should make the character more powerful. A feat should not have the potential to significantly increase the power of every character in the party.
As I mentioned before, build a character with appropriate WBL and one with appropriate WBL 1 level higher and then 2 levels higher. See if there are any noticeable differences in power. Now do this for a party of 4 and see what happens to their power. A feat should make the character more powerful. A feat should not have the potential to significantly increase the power of every character in the party.
As I've noted before, there are some feats which it would take a really inordinate amount of gear to duplicate; Manyshot, Power Attack, and other 'build critical' feats tend to do a LOT for the characters in question.
As well, I think it needs to be brought up that the choices here aren't 'No Gear' vs. "ALL OF THE GEAR", its "Sufficient Gear" vs. "More Gear Than That". Generally, a +2 item vs. a +3 item, a level or two later or earlier than the other guy (because remember, eventually the gear issue will become a non-issue; everyone eventually has The Good Stuff, and then the crafter loses out).
And as I've said before, I completely agree that if a character doubles his wealth, thats past reasonable; its too much. The same way RAGELANCEPOUNCE builds are too much. And the solution is the same; dont disallow the whole build (the components are generally fine independantly), but make it clear to your player that its all those components in combination which is the problem; set limits.
Normally, Time considerations are fairly self limiting on this; I've never had the time to 'double my wealth via crafting' due to the urgency of most campaigns I've seen, let alone to do this for the entire party.
Bob,
Take a barbarian of any level who, instead of focusing on combat feats, focused on feats to do something completely counter to combat ability. Let's say they focused on feats like Alertness, Acrobatics and Deceitful. Would you give them more powerful weapons so they "feel" as powerful as you think they should be? Likewise, what about the barbarian who focuses keenly on martial ability. Would you give them less powerful items so they "feel" about as powerful as you think a barbarian of a certain level should be? Using the rest of the party as a control who average their characters by taking some feats that help their class abilities and some feats that boost abilities not directly given by their class, let's say it's even: 50/50.
If you say you wouldn't adjust the gear then you would be going directly counter to your posts earlier that you make these adjustments per your feelings of the group and effectively giving that character more than his WBL may be appropriate to him.
If you would adjust the gear then barbarians of the same level quite probably do have a very different WBL from each other. In the earlier case of the non-combat oriented barbarian, you would need to give them much more powerful, and expensive, weaponry and armor so they are just as capable as the other barbarian to who did focus on combat and would have a lower overall gear value so you didn't "feel" they were overpowered.
Yet, if you allowed the combat oriented barbarian to have the same, more powerful gear at the same level it would break the very standard you set below.
I see a dichotomy here as you would be effectively holding each character to a different WBL standard with the "weaker" character needing more and the "stronger" character needing less gear. Am I understanding your position correctly? How would you handle this sort of disparity?
You are 100% correct. The WBL table does not take into account the feats and abilities of the characters. Which is exactly why I don't believe that the craft feats are meant to change the expected WBL. Since the table is to be applied roughly equally to all characters, then that should include characters that took crafting feats.
The feats don't say nor suggest that you are supposed to be able to exceed your expected wealth so there is no specific to override a general rule. I don't worry if a character is off their WBL by a little bit (it's a gut feeling, not a specific value) but when they are either significantly more powerful or weaker than the rest of the party, I have to step in and make adjustments to the treasure in the adventures.
|
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 gpConvenient, 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).
I doubt that a weapon coated in weapon blanch will maintain the qualities of its original material but yes, they will cost little. On the other hand your quiver will be empty after a few rounds. The big advantage is that this quiver will never be empty.
As you pointed out the item casting greater magic weapon is so-so.
So we can go back to the basic ed exchange that with:
Pearl of power, 1x: level 1, level 2 level 3 level 4
Total 30.000 GP.
Above mentioned quiver for 2.000 gp
+6 perception lenses for 3.600 gp
Hat of Alter self, constant, use activated: cost 24.000
You get to change aspect, if you use a medium size you get +2 bonus to strength, stackable with other bonuses, if you go small you get +2 to dexterity, +1 AD +1 to hit (and becoming a goblin you don't lose movement), you bow damage dice go from 1d8 to 1d6.
As needed you get: darkvision 60 feet, low-light vision, scent, and swim 30 feet.
Alternatively you can make (depending of what slots you have free and what stat isn't enhanced) hat/gauntlets/belt/robe, of strength/dexterity/constitution +4 for 16.000 gp.
Get plenty of other pearls of powers level 1-3.
And so on.
The hat alone is a frighteningly powerful utility. It don't increase your DPS, but its other uses more than cover for that.
I think you could delay one of your other feats one level to get this kind of bonuses.
The trick is that the combinations of existing and possible magic items are endlessly and 60K give you a lot of good stuff.
The pearl of power level 4 alone mean that you can use Divine power in one extra fight every day. Compare a +3 to hit, +3 to damage and +10 hp in one important fight to what your feats will do. What is better?
(I know, the reply depend on your group playing style, if you use the 15 minute adventuring day the feat probably is better, but I hope most groups will meet more than 1 important fight in one day while adventuring)
|
|
As I mentioned before, build a character with appropriate WBL and one with appropriate WBL 1 level higher and then 2 levels higher. See if there are any noticeable differences in power. Now do this for a party of 4 and see what happens to their power. A feat should make the character more powerful. A feat should not have the potential to significantly increase the power of every character in the party.As I've noted before, there are some feats which it would take a really inordinate amount of gear to duplicate; Manyshot, Power Attack, and other 'build critical' feats tend to do a LOT for the characters in question.
Yes and not. Metamagic feats are exceedingly easy to duplicate.
Gravity bow effects can duplicate some of the damage enhancing effects of Deadly Aim and Lead Blades can do the same for power attack.
A player willing to go to great length to increase his DPS can find terrific spells to transform into magic items.
I am almost sure that there is a spell in Pathfinder to make a arrow burst into multiple of itself when fired, so even manyshot could be duplicated for a few uses every day.
I think we can agree that Rule 0 is a real, working rule in effect.
So technically, yes, we can craft before story start, depending on the Dm.
The real question is, am I gonna buy all my materials at chargen and then make the stuff, cutting into story time, or will I ask to make them before we start, saving everyone a few days worth of story time.
The result is the same, a crafter WILL get his items, it's only a matter if it's gonna cut into the start of the story or not.
Or if your party decides to leave
Any GM that would let you take the first year of the game off to craft 300K worth of equipment would just allow you to craft it pre game.
If you want to take 150K worth of crafting supplies as your starting equipment in my game, that's fine. But I am not suspending time in game for half a year while you craft it into items. Nor do I suspect that the fighter, the rogue, and the cleric who didn't decide to go crafting routes will wait around on you. So you'll sit out the first 6 months of gaming while you're character crafts. Or, worse, things will catch up with you, like the orc warbands attacking your city, and you don't have equipment to fight them back with. Or the drow dig up from underground into the city, or whatever the story is about attacks.
The amount of conceit and self-righteousness required to say 'You will hold up the game for a year of in game time while I craft' is frankly staggering to me. If you're that important, go find another game, you're too much of a rockstar for me to want you in my games.
What this thread has convinced me of is that there are people who insist that they be allowed to min/max their characters by bending and twisting the rules into whatever pretzel it takes to give them their uber power. They must have more goodies and equipment than the other players, so that they may shine forth and show their awesomeness. And if it makes them unbalanced, or makes the GM's job more difficult, then they do not care. They do not even care that there are no rules for allowing it, they must have their way and their precious or they will cry foul and throw hissy fits, because they are not allowed to cheat and ignore the game's rules and balance.
Since I don't want to play with such people in my game, or in games I play in, I shall use it as a weather vein over who to avoid.
Done with this thread. Wish the Dev's would step in and end this stupid damn argument once and for all.
What this thread has convinced me of is that there are people who insist that they be allowed to min/max their characters by bending and twisting the rules into whatever pretzel it takes to give them their uber power. They must have more goodies and equipment than the other players, so that they may shine forth and show their awesomeness. And if it makes them unbalanced, or makes the GM's job more difficult, then they do not care. They do not even care that there are no rules for allowing it, they must have their way and their precious or they will cry foul and throw hissy fits, because they are not allowed to cheat and ignore the game's rules and balance.
Since I don't want to play with such people in my game, or in games I play in, I shall use it as a weather vein over who to avoid.
Done with this thread. Wish the Dev's would step in and end this stupid damn argument once and for all.
It took this thread for you to be convinced of that? I thought you got around more.
I guess i should point out that its not pregame crafting that irks me its when the rules don't apply equally and people are arguing that only craft can possibly happen before the game that can give a higher numeber than WBL and that everything else is simply how you reached yoru WBL that raises so much ire.
If Jack the blacksmith and Jim the wizard can have more money based off of their existance prior to game start the Bob the bard and Rick the thief have the same reason.
It took this thread for you to be convinced of that? I thought you got around more.
Actually, the more I read on the forums, the more I realize I've been rather lucky in that regard. I've never had a selfish player who insisted on twisting the rules to break the system. Every player I've had has been willing to reason and listen on rules. Not that I've not had issues with players before, but not this sort of thing. It's been not over rules, but over personalities. I've been *in* games with people like this, but never have had to deal with them as a GM. I usually just quit the game when I end up in a game with some jerk player.
It took this thread for you to be convinced of that? I thought you got around more.Actually, the more I read on the forums, the more I realize I've been rather lucky in that regard. I've never had a selfish player who insisted on twisting the rules to break the system. Every player I've had has been willing to reason and listen on rules. Not that I've not had issues with players before, but not this sort of thing. It's been not over rules, but over personalities. I've been *in* games with people like this, but never have had to deal with them as a GM. I usually just quit the game when I end up in a game with some jerk player.
Asking the Dm to use the Rule 0 to save story time is not playing the rules, it's not abusing rules either, that's what rule 0 is for.
We've established that we can buy the materials one way or the other, so that's not an issue. If WBL is, you will need to make Gunslinger class locked and remove the Rich Parents trait, as they do the same effect.
Calling people who use crafting feats as min-maxers is the same as using power attack with a two handed weapon, both are just trying to get the best of their feats. Your issue seems to be assuming that every crafter is a munchkin crafting infinite scrolls.
No his issue is once you open the door for legitmate reasons its open and tends to stay that way for the munchkin.
No his issue is once you open the door for legitmate reasons its open and tends to stay that way for the munchkin.
Well, just as the Dm could use rule 0 to allow, he doesn't have to be stupid about it. He's allowed to say no if the player seems to be abusing the allowance.
There's a difference between use and abuse, and once the DM says yes to pre-game crafting, he's allowed to define the range and shoot down any ideas he finds munchkin or stupid.
In my next game, we got a crafter, and a gunslinger, it's 3rd level.
The gunslinger will be able to make a second pistol to wield and a rifle using the Gunsmithing rules, what he won't be able to do is to make a stupid amount of guns to sell.
It really sounds like people are assuming that the crafters will be munchkins and the Dm not rational enough to say no to abuse.
Now your playing favorites since Jim got to craft but bob didn't.
BTW thats only two days of crafting time thats reasonable and with a moderate time limit its hard to munchkin.
Also dont insult peoples rational simply becasue they want to apply rules equally.
I can't justify banning a class feature after one player has it simply because player two found a way be epic with it now can I?
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.Well true.
If balance is a serious a concern with your group, I'd suggest Pathfinder Society rules for game. They are as close to balanced as possible.
This really nerfs several classes though.
Another option is to disallow rich parents as a trait.
This works well and not having the PC tuck away an extra wand (L1 bought retail is 750) or that pile of scrolls can make a DM feel better.
Assuming average rolls and you use my standard "load out" (on my webpage) for 20GP and save 25GP for bed and board, a standard wizard will only be able to scribe 2 L1 scrolls of spells he knows which is negligible in balance terms.
Otherwise I wouldn't sweat it but thats just my game. YGMV
I don't have any issue with Rich Parents. I have an issue with someone wanting to turn that 900 gold into 2700 through crafting. I doubt anyone is actually going to use that 900 gold to scribe 72 scrolls. I was pointing out that 900 gold is a lot, especially if you are allowing for crafting to double or triple your wealth.
My games are very balanced. I have a lot of experience keeping things balanced so I'm not concerned. The game has to be fun for everyone and everyone needs a level playing field. Their characters should all have the same resources. How they use those resources is up to them. I just make sure that no one is significantly more or less powerful than anyone else.
Now your playing favorites since Jim got to craft but bob didn't.
BTW thats only two days of crafting time thats reasonable and with a moderate time limit its hard to munchkin.
Also dont insult peoples rational simply becasue they want to apply rules equally.
I can't justify banning a class feature after one player has it simply because player two found a way be epic with it now can I?
I'm not playing favorites, as anyone can pick up crafting in PF, paizo made it more accessible by removing the xp cost, and making it possible to take a higher dc if you don't have the spells, not to mention the Feat that allows using crafting ranks instead of spell caster levels.
The rational comment wasn't an insult, it was an observation that the most common reason to object using rule 0 is that someone will abuse it if the DM let's one craft pre-game as if the Dm lost his option to say no later on.
If you want an insult, it's above:
"They do not even care that there are no rules for allowing it, they must have their way and their precious or they will cry foul and throw hissy fits, because they are not allowed to cheat and ignore the game's rules and balance.
Since I don't want to play with such people in my game, or in games I play in, I shall use it as a weather vein over who to avoid."
Fact is, the rule 0 applies, and the Dm controls how abused it is.
As said, if you base it all on WBL, then you HAVE to remove the gunslingers free pistol and Rich Parents trait, as they do exactly the same.
So, isn't allowing the traits or class feature that raise WBL but not feat, actually playing favorites since Bob became a Gunslinger with and rich parents, starting with roughly 2k worth of wealth, while Jim could fail at making at making the 12gp scrolls of the 4 spells he knows?
By favorites i mean this
Player A says: Hey i have Craft Weaponsmithing can i have made my MW sword myself so that its in my afforadable item range.
Player B says: Hey I have craft Weaponsmithing, Armorsmithing, Alchemy and brewpotion. So I have MW armor, MW weapon made a buunch of alchemical items for 1/3rd price and several potions for 1/2 price. And I'm and elf so i've plenty of time to do it.
If yo tell Player B no then you have in his eyes picked a favorite
As to the rest.
One Heirloom no longer gives a MW weapon.
Two the gunslingers weapons are way overpriced based on their use thankis to huge amounts of people screaming they were the Uber-broken.
Three i require a good back story when taking any trait not simply stating that you had rich parent.
And its not that jim might fail its that i use starting wealth to mean what you have earned made and found to this point in your life. Not that you suddenly fell into this money go buy stuff.
By favorites i mean this
Player A says: Hey i have Craft Weaponsmithing can i have made my MW sword myself so that its in my afforadable item range.
Player B says: Hey I have craft Weaponsmithing, Armorsmithing, Alchemy and brewpotion. So I have MW armor, MW weapon made a buunch of alchemical items for 1/3rd price and several potions for 1/2 price. And I'm and elf so i've plenty of time to do it.
If yo tell Player B no then you have in his eyes picked a favorite
As to the rest.
One Heirloom no longer gives a MW weapon.Two the gunslingers weapons are way overpowered based on their use thankis to huge amounts of people screaming they were the Uber-broken.
Three i require a good back story when taking any trait not simply stating that you had rich parent.
And its not that jim might fail its that i use starting wealth to mean what you have earned made and found to this point in your life. Not that you suddenly fell into this money go buy stuff.
Pardon me, I think I got confused somewhere.
I was thinking we were still talking about a very specific range of Craft Feats, which, at the op's original post, was 1st level, being limited to Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion, not crafting skills in general.Though the skills apply the same, the weaponsmith could buy his ore, then make it when game starts, the result will be same, either the DM let's him get it done with trough rule 0, and says Nay if it gets out of hand, or he tells the guy to spend in-game week to save 7.5gp to get his longsword.
Which is different from making 50 swords he can't sell for profit or can't carry around.
Edit:
The MW you mentioned is only accessible trough Rich Parents, and with crafting, it still costs 300gp, which is the exact same as simply buying one as starting weapon, the difference is, in the case of a MW longsword, 7.5.
Craft skills can make items that can be sold for profit since they are made for 1/3rd cost.
Once again and the last time i say this.
My issue is when its applied unfairly if any character has had anytime to do anything pregame the other characters have the same amount of time pregame. If not you are showing favoritims to either a set of feats or skills or what not.
Now if you as GM say you can have x weeks pregame to make craft perform or profession checks then we are all good if you just allow craft we have a problem.
edit the Difference in crating a MW longsword versus buying is 205g
Fact is, the rule 0 applies, and the Dm controls how abused it is.
As said, if you base it all on WBL, then you HAVE to remove the gunslingers free pistol and Rich Parents trait, as they do exactly the same.So, isn't allowing the traits or class feature that raise WBL but not feat, actually playing favorites since Bob became a Gunslinger with and rich parents, starting with roughly 2k worth of wealth, while Jim could fail at making at making the 12gp scrolls of the 4 spells he knows?
You don't have to remove those options at all. Some things are assumed to be class features. The gunslinger starts with a broken gun that only he can use. If he sells it, it is worth up to 40 gold when sold and it can only be sold for scrap. He can spend 300 gold to repair this but selling the weapon is then worth up to 1000 gold. He has managed to gain 700 gold out of this, assuming he wants to sell his initial weapon/class feature and not really be able to be much of a gunslinger.
The wizard begins play with a spell book, and all 0 level spells plus about 5 1st level spells (17 Intelligence). That is valued at 20*12.5 (CRB only 0 level spells) + 5*25 + 15 + 350 (the most expensive weapon he would have if he took Arcane Bond with a weapon he is proficient with). That's 645 gold. Sure, he can sell all of this off for 322 gold but then he doesn't have much in the way of class features anymore.
The Rich Parents trait isn't that bad either. It doesn't even put the character into level 2 WBL. It's close, but not there.
So let's assume that the Gunslinger sells his gun and had Rich Parents. What did he get out of this? He sold the most expensive gun he had for 1000 gold but it cost him 300 to fix it in the first place, netting him a 700 gold profit. He has Rich Parents so he has 1500 gold. Now he needs a gun but he can only afford a cheaper one, at 1000 gold. He now has 500 gold. He has actually started off worse than when he started.
It's not really all that much different for the wizard. He sells the partial spellbook and heavy crossbow for a whopping 322 gold. Add that to the 900 for Rich Parents and he's at 1272 gold. Now he needs a spellbook and another weapon so he can use his Arcane Bond. This weapon is now going to run him 500 gold (200 because he is replacing it at level 1 and 300 more because it has to be masterwork). So he has managed to spend 200 gold more than he needed to while ending up almost exactly where he started.
Rich Parents isn't a problem. Class Features aren't a problem.
Fact is, the rule 0 applies, and the Dm controls how abused it is.
As said, if you base it all on WBL, then you HAVE to remove the gunslingers free pistol and Rich Parents trait, as they do exactly the same.So, isn't allowing the traits or class feature that raise WBL but not feat, actually playing favorites since Bob became a Gunslinger with and rich parents, starting with roughly 2k worth of wealth, while Jim could fail at making at making the 12gp scrolls of the 4 spells he knows?
You don't have to remove those options at all. Some things are assumed to be class features. The gunslinger starts with a broken gun that only he can use. If he sells it, it is worth up to 40 gold when sold and it can only be sold for scrap. He can spend 300 gold to repair this but selling the weapon is then worth up to 1000 gold. He has managed to gain 700 gold out of this, assuming he wants to sell his initial weapon/class feature and not really be able to be much of a gunslinger.
The wizard begins play with a spell book, and all 0 level spells plus about 5 1st level spells (17 Intelligence). That is valued at 20*12.5 (CRB only 0 level spells) + 5*25 + 15 + 350 (the most expensive weapon he would have if he took Arcane Bond with a weapon he is proficient with). That's 645 gold. Sure, he can sell all of this off for 322 gold but then he doesn't have much in the way of class features anymore.
The Rich Parents trait isn't that bad either. It doesn't even put the character into level 2 WBL. It's close, but not there.
So let's assume that the Gunslinger sells his gun and had Rich Parents. What did he get out of this? He sold the most expensive gun he had for 1000 gold but it cost him 300 to fix it in the first place, netting him a 700 gold profit. He has Rich Parents so he has 1500 gold. Now he needs a gun but he can only afford a cheaper one, at 1000 gold. He now has 500 gold. He has actually started off worse than when he started.
It's not really all that much different for the wizard. He...
But in that example, both characters are selling and buying things in what seems to be an attempt to play the system.
From my experience, the wizard crafts a few scrolls while the gunslinger keeps his gun because selling it makes no sense at 1st level. The wizard now saved a few coins on making a handful of scrolls, spending rest of his money on other equipment and some that he may spend on luxury when in town.
Again, difference is, you seem to be assuming that the crafter will abuse the option to make things rather than take it for what it was, an option to not spend days getting 5 more scrolls.
If the event where a wizard asked if he could make 10 scrolls came up, I'd say yes, heck, I'd even let him make 15. 20 and up would start getting out of hand, and I'd tell him no, tone it down to 10-15. Not that this ever came up, even when I cascaded the Craft Feats into a single feat, which like skill bonus feats scale with level.
The biggest issue with pre-game crafting has been digging trough the backpack for the spell he wanted.
@Bob - you need to stop using arbitrary numbers like having 2700gp at first level instead of the potential 1884.5 that I already went over in a previous post. There is no chance that 900 gp worth of craft materials can become more than that with a starting wealth of 900gp + the 5% reduced cost of materials for the hedge magician trait.
900 gold being used to potentially craft gear at 1/3 the cost. Basic math is 900*3=2700. I didn't even use the Hedge Magician Trait because I was referring to just crafting gear using the craft skill.
You two have become far too emotional over this topic and refuse to look at things logically because as was implied in your initial posts, you've had issues with munchkin abuse. Or in Bob's case you were the munchkin. Maybe its time to bow out because resorting to insults and insinuation isn't constructive to an argument.
I have yet to become emotional. I haven't done one bit of insulting or getting angry. I have actually asked a few others to not insult me and Buri apologized for the misunderstanding of how he said something (which I forget to say thank you for, my bad). He even edited his post which I am grateful for. I couldn't edit mine because it had been too long. At no point have I gotten emotional.
As for logic, obviously there are two schools of thought. I would like to point out that mdt and I have been completely logical and consistent without having to result to house rules or Rule 0. Our understanding of the rules are consistent through all levels of play and don't need a case-by-case basis to maintain fairness and balance.
You guys cry for a dev to come clear this up but they've already cleared this up by introducing rule 0 and giving full control to the GM. If you think pre-game crafting is over powered its your right to say no. The unfortunate part of this is that the only thing that supports your ruling is for a level 1 character due to the terms of starting wealth which states every character starts with X gold coins based off of the table listed. For characters beyond 1st level, they come with a history of already being an adventurer and it's not up to you to decide how much time they could have had for crafting in their adventures as per the RAW. It is up to you if you think that this will unbalance your campaign and in this case you have rule 0.
This sounds a lot like the Oberoni Fallacy. Rule 0 does not address the issue at all. Just because you can house rule something does not mean that the issue has been addressed. I can house rule all kinds of things, but that doesn't mean the original rule was not unbalanced.
I do not need the devs to come in to tell me how to run my games (just like you don't need them for yours). What I would like is for them to explain for others what the intention is. This question pops up in various forms on a constant basis. It was an issue in 3E. Then in 3.5. And now in Pathfinder. Seems like something that could have and should have been explained in much better detail years ago. Think about how quickly these threads would come to a close.
Stop trolling/enciting people into further argument because you have had problems with munchkins. Not all of us have or will. Some of us are mature indivuals that know when to draw the line, and see your view on this topic to be GM fiat more than anything that could be deemed an official ruling. This is why my next character will be a spear wielding fighter and not some munchkin epic strength/power attacking/falchion wielding stereotype.
Just because you disagree doesn't mean we are trolling. Perhaps it's not me with the losing control of my emotions.
I enjoy role playing. If you have players that don't then let them know they're not right in your campaigns. If your players aren't a problem like you've stated then you have no argument to base your opinion on in this forum other than the implications of the possibility of munchkin abuse.
So the solution is for the GM to use fiat but you are faulting us because you think we are using GM fiat?
One more time... Rule 0.
This does not address the actual question nor solution(s). Instead it throws the issue only in the GMs lap without anything to help the GM know what to do. How should a new GM handle this question? How does an inexperienced GM know when a player is abusing something? How does an inexperienced GM know how to prevent the abuse in the first place? How does an inexperienced GM make adjustments if he doesn't even know what the problem is in the first place? Rule 0 isn't the solution.
What this thread has convinced me of is that there are people who insist that they be allowed to min/max their characters by bending and twisting the rules into whatever pretzel it takes to give them their uber power. They must have more goodies and equipment than the other players, so that they may shine forth and show their awesomeness. And if it makes them unbalanced, or makes the GM's job more difficult, then they do not care. They do not even care that there are no rules for allowing it, they must have their way and their precious or they will cry foul and throw hissy fits, because they are not allowed to cheat and ignore the game's rules and balance.
Since I don't want to play with such people in my game, or in games I play in, I shall use it as a weather vein over who to avoid.
Done with this thread. Wish the Dev's would step in and end this stupid damn argument once and for all.
LOL at saying that giving 6 months worth of crafting time to a midlevel character at generation will let them marginalize the entire group or a couple weeks worth to a low level character or even a year or two to a high level character. If you had any predilection that I've insinuated a character should be given several or even a dozen years worth of crafting time you're nuts.
Depends it he is a mundane crafter then no but he proably can't do much in that time.
However the Magic guy can in 6 months of 30 days each make 180,000 worth of magic items using only 90,000 gold assuming he has that much thus if he has 90,000 or less he could double his wealth in 6 months.
Khrysaor, your breakdown made think I should me share what I meant in my post as you, Talonhawke, probably didn't know my context. I consider pretty much anything under the teens to be "low level" with low to mid-teens to be mid-level and high teens (17/18+ depending) to 20 to be high level. I double checked this assumption against the WBL chart and I think it's at least somewhat accurate given it takes you to level 9 to get a WBL of 40k yet the jump from levels 12 to 13 is 40k for a total of 140k at 13 so there's clearly an exponential curve there since you get 3x the wealth in under half the number of levels.
Thus, I would probably award a character with anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two if they were below level 13. A character 13 to 16 a few months to several months and a character 17+ several months to a year for crafting time and as long as what they wanted was purchasable with their WBL, with anything "extra" (the services of another mage, for example) being a percentage die roll and if that failed they couldn't craft the piece, and could be crafted in that time I would probably give it to them.
All this would be contingent upon their backstory (are they a full time crafter who considers crafting their lifeblood versus hobbyist who just supplements/improves their gear), how busy they've been, culture, etc. I think allowing pre-first-session crafting to be representative of a characters latest work or to be representative of their "nearest and dearest" pieces so that is the general pretext I would operate from.
I've never ran into the situation where I would say my entire playgroup would rather be full time crafters at this point as I play with a good mix of people you could describe as the optimizer bunch, people who just show up to have fun around a table and don't really care about the game per se but know it and play it, and others who want to just hack and slash and just want to be able to flip pages and buy what they want. If I ran into a situation where a large majority of the party "suddenly" wanted to be full time crafters I would limit this and start denying requests as it's not representative of the culture of the games I play in. I wouldn't dictate what they had to be otherwise but I would inform players that I can't allow that many crafters for the reason I just stated and let them rethink their choice. If the setting was based upon a crafting guild type backdrop then it would be odd if at least several of the party weren't crafters.
TLDR: The pre-first-session crafting thing really depends on context.
I'm in agreement with you entirely except the consideration on your level rankings. I think anything post 16 is pretty much epic. When you hit the teens you are high level, mid range would be 7 until the teens and low is 1-6. I was just posting how reasonably a munchkin could pull off saying he's been a full time crafter and the obvious nature behind someone crafting while they are gaming.
If that's how you see the levels, that's cool. I'm operating from the perspective of the book which states epic is 21+. For a player saying their guy has been a full time crafter I would then scrutinize his feats and skills and other points of his background that don't make sense. "Oh, how did you have time to go off and study martial arts for a decade in a monestary to gain these 10 levels in monk?", for instance. Any parts that just flat out didn't make sense I would tell them to cut. You can't expect me to believe you've been a life long master crafter, an expert swordsman who can weild almost any blade and their associated styles (single vs dual wielding, for exmaple), etc. In that sense you'd have to pick and choose.
It's just as likely for someone to find the time while adventuring through the low to mid levels to craft away every copper they have. When you get to the high end of the spectrum the money scales exponentially and you would therefore need an exponential time to craft it all. This time might not be possible when you're out adventuring and in between levels especially if you're dungeon crawling non stop or lost in some outer plane.
Yup.
|
|
Asking the Dm to use the Rule 0 to save story time is not playing the rules, it's not abusing rules either, that's what rule 0 is for.
We've established that we can buy the materials one way or the other, so that's not an issue. If WBL is, you will need to make Gunslinger class locked and remove the Rich Parents trait, as they do the same effect.
Calling people who use crafting feats as min-maxers is the same as using power attack with a two handed weapon, both are just trying to get the best of their feats. Your issue seems to be assuming that every crafter is a munchkin crafting infinite scrolls.
Again this false dichotomy:
"A class feature would cost money if done in game by someone that is not of that class, so it is clear that people is entitled to more money at start."Already dismissed for the cavalier free mount so now you need to use the gunslinger battered weapon as a strawman.
You haven't a valid argument instead of trying this king of tricks?
I know, I failed a will save.
However, for those wanting to craft starting wealth, and wanting to get a balanced 'limit' to it, here's one that is consistent with the existing rules, although it's still a houserule.
A trait is worth one-half of a feat (this is stated by the devs, and you can get a feat that gives two traits, so this is a valid statement). There is a trait that gives 900gp when you take it (note that even if you take it at 10th level, it still only gives 900gp, so it doesn't scale with level). Therefore, by the logic that a feat is worth two traits, then any pre-game crafting should be limited to adding no more than 1,800 gp to the character's wealth by level.
There you go, a logical limit based on existing feat equivalents in the system. Note that you're basically letting a feat (craft arms and armor, or craft wondrous item) count as MORE than two traits if you do this, since you're doubling the trait and still giving something else, but at least it's a houserule actually based on the rules as present in the game, rather than some arbitrary pulled out of my *** number.
...adding no more than 1,800 gp to the character's wealth...Technically the trait sets your starting wealth at 900 gp, it doesn't add 900 gp.
It could be considered to add as much as 890 (monk minimum starting wealth of 10 gp) or as little as 600 (Cavalier/Fighter/Paladin/Ranger maximum starting wealth of 300 gp).
...but yeah, the point you made stands - if 900 gp starting wealth is a valid trait (I personally feel it is a bit too much), then that indicates that 1,800 gp starting wealth is a valid feat if all it does is increase starting wealth.
yeah, I didn't want to get into the math, just wanted to use a round number. But either way, a full feat shouldn't do more than add that much to your wealth by level, especially if it has other benefits. Anyone saying they should get an additional 20K of crafting at level 10 is obviously gaining way more advantage with one feat than a feat should be worth.
Not all feats scale.
Weapon Focus is +1. Period.
Weapon Finesse allows you to use your dex bonus, not str bonus. It doesn't scale, you don't get dex bonus * level, or dex bonus every N levels.
In fact, most feats do not scale. Especially the Crafting Feats. You don't get to craft faster as you level up. You don't get to craft more as you level up (and before you say 'Caster Level', most things (A) don't have caster level requirements anymore, and (B) multiclassing would up your level but not your CL). For every feat that does scale, such as power attack, there are at least 5 that don't. So that argument is a strawman, sorry, buzz, try again.
lol and yet some feats do scale. So who are you to say this one doesn't. Craft feats scale in the sense that you gain skill points applied to them as you level. You do get to craft items faster as you level as you can use the +5 increased DC on items that you previously couldn't due to the initial DC not being achieveable with a low skill.
No, they don't scale.
Your skill scales, if you keep putting skill ranks into it. Skill Focus scales (at level 10). Craft Wondrous Item doesn't scale. It's a flat benefit. It gives you the ability to craft wondrous items. Period. If it gave you the ability to crate wondrous items at 3rd level, and minor artifacts at 18th, and major artifacts at 25, then it would scale.
Skill points are totally separate from the feat. By your logic, Weapon Focus would 'scale' because it adds one to your BAB and your BAB increases by level. But it doesn't, and it isn't, and the craft feats don't either.
So again, craft feats don't scale.
EDIT : You can make up any feat you want for homebrew, such as 'Infinite Wealth', must be taken at character creation. You spent all your time crafting selling and crafting prior to game start, and start with 1 beeelion GP. That doesn't make it a valid feat in the game, and it doesn't make it a logical feat extension from the rules. You wanted something that would fit with existing structure, but now that I've pointed it out, you don't like it, because it's not powerful enough in addition to the feat ability you are already getting by taking the CWI feat in the first place.