TriOmegaZero wrote: Cheapy wrote: So much nerdrage over how the rules were always intended... Who's raging? Definitely not me. No Barbarian levels. I'm running low on rage and don't want to be fatigued. Wish I was a martial artist.
Darkwing Duck wrote: Khrysaor wrote: Cracked Dusty Rose Ioun Stone;
500gp
+1 Competence bonus on inititive.
Seems they're not that expensive.
Dueling weapon enchantment;
14000gp
+4 enhancement bonus to init.
Bunch of other bonuses but restricted to light weapons that have to be drawn.
These are all good starts for how you'd price an initiative item.
Ioun stones are not good as a basis of price comparison for ANY reason (not just the one being discussed in this thread) because they are easily taken away from the user (grasp vs. AC 24). The fact that they are so easily removed leads to them being seriously under priced.
A Dueling weapon isn't a good basis for comparison for this discussion either because
a.) Its a typed bonus
b.) As you said, the bonus only applies when the weapon is drawn
c.) The weapon must be a finesse weapon (and therefore has a small damage die)
Considering those three factors, the 22,000 gp that I listed is probably pretty pretty low considering that, with those three limitations just listed, the cost is only 7,000 gp less. These are items that give a direct bonus to initiative. They are a far better choice to use than something that gives you dex. As I said it's items to draw a comparison from. Do with them as you like.
Fergie wrote: Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Wizard 5, WBL chart says he should have 10,500 gp. Even if you are dumb and let him craft 21,000 gp worth of items...
Wait. What?
You just ruled that, "If you're equipping a higher-level PC, you have to count crafted items at their Cost. " Now it is dumb when someones does that?
So OK, you can get more then your WBL, but the GM needs to set limits on what you can craft, vs what you are forced to buy at retail? How does that answer the question that started this horror show of a thread?
Honestly the text of the FAQ seems to push very hard for being able to double your WBL by crafting. Nothing in it hints at limiting anything but what percentage goes to armor vs other items. Since most of the best items a that theoretical wizard is going to craft are things like a headband of intellect, or winged boots or some other item that seems completely allowed by the "Balanced approach", it seems any limit is based on that house rule.
If you didn't think doubling up WBL was OK, you might want to reread the text of the FAQ, because it sure seems to allow it by my reading, and apparently several other posters.
EDIT: I feel that all the FAQ needs to satisfy everyone is to include a note that, "The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game assumes that all PCs of equivalent level have roughly equal amounts of treasure and magic items. " and that crafting is not intended to disrupt that.
The FAQ says the limitations are to be set by the GM. This means that you get to make the choices so it doesn't upset the balance of your campaign. Arguing that this means a player can have double the wealth and that makes me cry means you're not doing your due diligence that the FAQ told you to do.
Your edit is bogus. The line you want in there only satisfies the group that think there should be no economic gain from a feat that directly affects economics. Crafting is intended to disrupt the WBL table. This is why the FAQ was made to tell you this. You can also choose to give no benefit as your GM right, but when your players cry because they are falling behind and becoming wall flowers for taking a feat that hasn't helped them keep up with the non-crafters that took combat oriented feats you will understand the point.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Sorry, I was a little distracted when I wrote that.
Then I'm glad you're finally agreeing that the FAQ entry as written was a mistake.
As for saying that 3e FR was widely panned, I apologize. I had it confused with 4e FR.
Darkwing Duck wrote: Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Sorry, I was a little distracted when I wrote that.
Then I'm glad you're finally agreeing that the FAQ entry as written was a mistake. Nice try, but I was referring to my "Let him spend 21 days crafting" comment in this thread, not to that FAQ entry, which I and Jason stand behind.
Sean K Reynolds wrote: Darkwing Duck wrote: Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Sorry, I was a little distracted when I wrote that.
Then I'm glad you're finally agreeing that the FAQ entry as written was a mistake. Nice try, but I was referring to my "Let him spend 21 days crafting" comment in this thread, not to that FAQ entry, which I and Jason stand behind. Are you trying to say that you don't make decisions in a vacuum? That you consult with other developers to make sure that the FAQ represents what Paizo wants and not your own personal opinion(s)? No way!
So I'm GMing a Pathfinder game, and want it to be at the "default" level of power.
How much should I allow a new PC with crafting feats to make his own gear, and how much of his gear should he pay retail price for?
Khrysaor wrote:
The FAQ says the limitations are to be set by the GM. This means that you get to make the choices so it doesn't upset the balance of your campaign. Arguing that this means a player can have double the wealth and that makes me cry means you're not doing your due diligence that the FAQ told you to do.
Your edit is bogus. The line you want in there only satisfies the group that think there should be no economic gain from a feat that directly affects economics. Crafting is intended to disrupt the WBL table. This is why the FAQ was made to tell you this. You...
You keep misrepresenting the disagreement.
First, the cost of production is not the same thing as wealth. Wealth is how much a person owns. The cost of production is how much it costs to make something. They aren't the same thing.
Second, SKR's FAQ entry says that a person can take advantage of crafting even at character creation. What it does NOT give is any limit for how much over the character's WBL the character can increase his wealth using crafting (including at character creation).
Third, while he claims that every feat should give something in return which should be equal to the cost of the feat, the fact is that doubling one's WBL (or even increasing one's WBL by 40%) is far, FAR, FAR more powerful than any other feat in the book (with the debatable exception of leadership - which has always been treated as a special case).
So, what he is deliberately doing is driving the unbalanced system so far deeper into unbalanced territory that we might as well just create our own house system from scratch. In fact, there have been multiple people who have stated since he made that FAQ entry that they would just house rule to get rid of it. NOT ONE person who has defended it has said that they'd use it. NOT ONE person who has defended it has explained how they decide which rules they think are good or bad.
Fourth, as for just house ruling it, yes, we can do that. But, as was proven when Pathfinder got started (and there was a mass exodus from 4e), the future of the system depends on the good will of the customers. When bad rules are created (and this rule is not only bad, its ludicrous), the customers [ should protest.
Frankly, because it so completely further destroys balance while, at the same time, encourages the Christmas tree effect, I think this FAQ entry has nothing to do with wanting a good game system and everything to do with wanting to sell magic item books.
Might I suggest deleting some of your last posts and taking a break people?
Why should we delete posts? Darkwing Duck set the precedent by insulting a developer on the board and being rude and obnoxious to anyone who provides input. Obviously he's right.
Its designed to be whatever is suitable to fit your campaign. If 100% doesn't break your game and 1% doesn't break your game, then 100% is as good as 1%. They can't give a finite number as the variables will change based off of every character.
mdt wrote: Anyway Fergie, to answer your question up thread, after the FAQ, there's no guidance within the rules about how much you can overspend on WBL with the craft feats, it's 100% up to the GM. So it's anywhere from 1% to 100% more. Then this 20 page thread has all been worth it!
First person to reach the 1,000th post gets final call on the whole thing...
GO!
Khrysaor wrote: Why should we delete posts? Darkwing Duck set the precedent by insulting a developer on the board and being rude and obnoxious to anyone who provides input. Obviously he's right. I also publicly apologized for the ad hominem and said that I should have focused on this ridiculous FAQ entry, not on SKR.
Fergie wrote: mdt wrote: Anyway Fergie, to answer your question up thread, after the FAQ, there's no guidance within the rules about how much you can overspend on WBL with the craft feats, it's 100% up to the GM. So it's anywhere from 1% to 100% more. Then this 20 page thread has all been worth it!
First person to reach the 1,000th post gets final call on the whole thing...
GO!
But if up to 12 posts are deleted after someone hits that magic number, do we have to follow his call or will there be a shift in the continuum?
Bob_Loblaw wrote: Fergie wrote: mdt wrote: Anyway Fergie, to answer your question up thread, after the FAQ, there's no guidance within the rules about how much you can overspend on WBL with the craft feats, it's 100% up to the GM. So it's anywhere from 1% to 100% more. Then this 20 page thread has all been worth it!
First person to reach the 1,000th post gets final call on the whole thing...
GO!
But if up to 12 posts are deleted after someone hits that magic number, do we have to follow his call or will there be a shift in the continuum? Continuums? Where we're going we won't need continuums.
OK Khrysaor, you win! So I'm GMing a Pathfinder game, and want it to be at the "default" level of power.
How much should I allow a new PC with crafting feats to make his own gear, and how much of his gear should he pay retail price for?
What is your ruling?
Everyone shall be a monk with a vow of poverty, vow of peace, and a vow of silence. Magic is outlawed and non existant. Weapons are outlawed and non existant. Equipment is outlawed and non existant. No one complains due to their vows.
Sean K Reynolds wrote: Darkwing Duck wrote: Yes, while Jason is lead designer at Paizo, others helped work on the core rules. You didn't. Wrong.
Darkwing Duck wrote: While PF is based on 3e which was designed by Monte, Skip, Jonathon, et al, you had no part in designing the 3e core rules. Wrong.
Darkwing Duck wrote: What you did work on was 3e Forgotten Realms And core D&D 3E. And Greyhawk. And Ravenloft. And Birthright. And Dragonlance. But that's okay.
Darkwing Duck wrote: (which I've never heard anything good about and a whole lot of bad about). I guess the Best Roleplaying Supplement Origins Award for the 3E Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting was for the pretty pictures. It's not like I've ever had diehard Greyhawk fans who hate the Realms ever tell me, "your book made me want to run games in FR." Oops, except I have had that happen.
Darkwing Duck wrote: You will never find me being a professional game designer as I couldn't handle the massive pay cut down to what even the best game designer makes. Stay classy! SKR just won the internets!
I've always enjoyed everything SKR worked on back in 3.5, trolls gonna troll I guess...
Seriously though Fergie. The idea is that you just keep things relative. Use the standard WBL table as that is the standard and provide a minor benefit and see how it plays out. Everything is dependant on the level at which you take the crafting feats to get the most out of them. It is also dependant on how much money a character can accumulate, the time they have to use it, the towns they come across for crafting, and more.
There is no set value that can be given as each campaign will vary. In our Kingmaker campaign I played a cleric of Abadar and he was a businessman. I want to start my own magic shop with him and design uniques for the town to help in its defense and prosperity. This was the first time I played D&D in about 15 years and I'm sure there was hesitance on our GMs part as to what my aims were with the feats. I didn't ask for more than the WBL and just used what I could when I could. Kingmaker provides a lot of downtime for town building where a player can craft. My character does have more than his WBL should be but it hasn't upset the game balance. I don't really shine any more than anyone else. In fact, due to misadventure and bad saves I was the one getting beat down from the shining members who got magic jarred.
The best thing you can do will be to see what your players aims are and be reasonable. If he wants to have a bunch of cool items that will help the party like a bag of holding when the party doesn't have one, or campfire beads or things that don't affect his performance in any way, they will not affect the CR balance by him exceeding WBL and he may suffer more if he doesn't gear himself appropriately.
Since item values scale as you level (+1 weapon 2000gp, +2 8000gp, +3 18000gp) Having the extra wealth usually doesn't equate to much of a benefit. With the standard restrictions in place like requiring a caster level of 3 times the enchantment (weapons/armor) it should never be something that will get out of hand. Having a +2con/+2str belt when the rest of the party only has a +2 str belt really doesn't break anything.
You just have to find the relative balance. Obviously a player didn't make his armor and enchant it. He probably found a +1 suit while adventuring before making it to level 5 so that part of the value would be the full value and not the crafted value. It's work on the GM's part and you can tell your players to do the math and make it more their part with just your approval.
It's just this fear thing that people keep bringing up about players are now entitled to have +100% wealth when there's nothing that says that is true. The FAQ says they should be entitled to a monetary increase from having the crafting feats since that's what they inherently do and it's up to the GM to set a limit.
I argued way earlier in this thread that the GMG has rules for rich characters in it that account for a 10%-20% wealth increase beyond the standard WBL. Just make sure that the value you are giving will not upset the balance and set limits as to where the money can be allocated like SKR was saying with a 40% in armor instead of 25%. And make sure to keep the one rule of no item being more than 50% of a characters wealth.
EDIT: you may have to remind some players that even though they are joining at level 10 and can have some wealth attributed to crafted items, that they were once a part of another adventuring party and if you were their crafter you were also spending time making items for them or making items like those mentioned above that provide a utility bonus and not everything would have been spent on increasing your main skill set.
|
