How was the Wealth by Level chart constructed?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 1,112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

This is a thread mostly intended to be an FAQ-catch for the thread "Scribe Scroll with starting gold." (http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz4wuc?Scribe-Scroll-with-starting-gold) The issue has been debated at length there, yet feel free to debate any other points here, of course.

My question is: In the context of crafting, should a crafted item's full market value be held against the WBL to determine their wealth or is crafting meant to allow a character exceed their WBL per RAW?

I ask since those feats and skills allow crafters to create items at 1/2 or 1/3 the cost of the item, respectively, and WBL defines a certain amount of gold pieces a character can use to equip their character. It makes sense to me a crafting-oriented character would have used at least part of his wealth to craft some gear and, as such, that crafted gear would only consume 1/3 or 1/2 of his money and would have the rest to put toward other things.

The other side of the argument is that even though they can craft at this reduced cost, the full market value of item is weighed against the WBL. So, assuming I have 1,000 gp at character creation and I can make an item whose material cost is 100 gp, even though the end result is an item worth 300 gp if sold at market, after saying I crafted that item I only have 700 gp to spend on other things rather than 900 gp.

I think pretty much everyone is on board with the fact that GMs can mold things as appropriate to their campaign. However, I'm curious, if per RAW and developer intent, crafters are yet another special case to a rule.

Thanks.


Just to clarify, I'm not asking for dev input or rules on how much starting money can/should/must/whatever be put toward crafting. I'm simply asking if utilizing the craft mechanics should allow a character to exceed his WBL.


First off wealth by level is a guidelines. This is extremely important to me as it isn't the same as saying, "You must do it this way and anything else isn't RAW."

After that I feel that the craft feats should not allow you to exceed wealth by level. After all they are part of the basic assumptions of the game (that the feats are available) and as such are assumed into the wealth by level base in my opinion.


5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ex. Figther A and Fighter B have followed different paths in life. Fighter A was a soldier where Fighter B was a blacksmith who learned to enchant his blades. They are both of equal level and are seeking the same equipment. While adventuring together they come across 20,000gp in items and 10,000gp in gold coins. They split, equally, their spoils of war so that both of them have 10,000gp in items and 5000gp in gold. While in town, Fighter A sells all his items for 1/2 market value gaining 5000gp to bring his total to 10,000gp. He then uses his money to purchase the 10,000gp sword he's been seeking. Fighter B sells his items, bringing his total up to the 10,000gp needed to purchase the same sword he's been seeking. Instead he chooses to buy a masterwork sword from the local smith and begins enchanting it. Over the course of the next 5 days(2.5 days accelerated), he enchants his weapon and now has the same weapon as Fighter A and 5000gp where Fighter A has 0gp.

Effectively, Fighter B has increased his wealth using his skills that Fighter A could not do.

Does this break the RAW? Should Fighter B not receive treasure until Fighter A catches up? Where are the limitations that can stop munchkin abuse beyond time?


Maybe if we get enough FAQ's, we can get a Blog post or other informative post about this :) Everyone hit that FAQ button!


Abraham spalding wrote:

First off wealth by level is a guidelines. This is extremely important to me as it isn't the same as saying, "You must do it this way and anything else isn't RAW."

After that I feel that the craft feats should not allow you to exceed wealth by level. After all they are part of the basic assumptions of the game (that the feats are available) and as such are assumed into the wealth by level base in my opinion.

What does this mean? If you mean crafters should not be able to craft more than what they can buy in materials then I understand and agree completely. However, all WBL does is determine the amount of gp a character of a given level has with which to buy stuff at character creation. Then, crafting comes in and says they can use it to buy materials with that gold with which the crafter can create items. There is no cap on how much they can create as long as they have the gp to buy any necessary materials.


Well first off I talk to the players about it.

I point out that they don't have to loot every last copper they find on opponents, that I will make sure they have what they need and keep in mind their desires along the way. I also point out that if they do loot every last copper and grab everything not nailed down I'll be much more stringy on passing out stuff as the campaign goes on because I am going to keep them where I am comfortable on the wealth level for my game.

If they want to exceed wealth by level with crafting I'm not too horribly upset with it as long as they keep everyone else at about their level too. If they don't... well there is sundering, stealing, and other tricks both fair and foul that I can employ to get things back where I want them as a GM.

However I much prefer a light hand when it comes to the PCs, and therefore I start with talking to them about expectations.

If one guy is trying to always grab "His fair share" of the loot, and is then crafting only for himself and is charging other PCs for 'services rendered' in the form of healing and raise dead and the like then I make sure he tracks every last copper, and every last bit of encumbrance, plus all his spell components (instead of simply saying, "I've got 10,000 gp in expensive spell components which I'm normally good with). He best be ready for me to watch every crafting roll and account for every hour he spends crafting or not and when he prepares his spells.

Now that can be fairly passive aggressive -- however again I do tell them what is going on before it happens and why it is happening.

At my table I pretty much have done away with the craft item feats. A player wants to craft it himself I'm fine with that -- it still 'costs' according to his wealth by level at full value.

Another thing we have done in the past is simply let the story and what not go on and reset wealth by level every time the party levels.

Silver Crusade

The WBL chart is way broken IMO. A wizard cannot buy a staff until level 8 or beyond. IN PFS he would have to expend almost all of his gold by 10th level to by a good staff thats just broke the Staff is the wizards most Iconic item.

Note I have not plaed a caster until recently I play a Bladebound Magus
which I really like. I find the chichy amount of gold given out really hampers a caster. try buying a 2nd or third level wand with the screwy you can only buy a 50 charge wand rule. thats 11250 gp out of 16500 total gp for a 6th level arcane caster thats just plain stupid. Whom ever sat down and did the wWBL table did not sit down and chat with the person who priced magic items or the person who came up with the screwy you can't craft rule in PFS. Whit is the diffrent between crafting and going to rays wand o matic wand store plundking down your glod and having Ray the mage craft your fully charged wand. Why would ray spend all his time crafting wands for shulb pathfinders to buy?

The simple soultion to this would be to let casters of all sorts craft items for thier personal use no selling or crafting for thier noncaster friends. Why would casters waste thier time crafting items for others to use anyway it takes time from thier arcane or divine study and everyone knows all arcane casters are like the Brain [Pinky and the Brain ] ploting on ways for themselves to rule Golorian. Not toiling away in a dusty dank lab cranking out wands staffs and the like for
for Pathfinders.


Lou Diamond wrote:


Note I have not plaed a caster until recently I play a Bladebound Magus
which I really like. I find the chichy amount of gold given out really hampers a caster. try buying a 2nd or third level wand with the screwy you can only buy a 50 charge wand rule. thats 11250 gp out of 16500 total gp for a 6th level arcane caster thats just plain stupid. Whom ever sat down and did the wWBL table did not sit down and chat with the person who priced magic items or the person who came up with the screwy you can't craft rule in PFS. Whit is the diffrent between crafting and going to rays wand o matic wand store plundking down your glod and having Ray the mage craft your fully charged wand. Why would ray spend all his time crafting wands for shulb pathfinders to buy?

Because he gets paid 10,000+ for each and doesn't have to go out and have people try to kill him?

Seems Ray might be smarter than the average adventurer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

No might about it, Ray is smarter than the average adventurer.

He works two weeks a year, makes one staff. Get's say, 6K in profit. That pays for him to live like a rich merchant for a year, plenty of money to do research, pay 10 wenches to live with him full time, whatever. If he really wants to live it up, he works one month a year and has 12K in profits.

I'd say Ray has more brains than the average adventuring party combined.


Lou Diamond wrote:

The WBL chart is way broken IMO. A wizard cannot buy a staff until level 8 or beyond. IN PFS he would have to expend almost all of his gold by 10th level to by a good staff thats just broke the Staff is the wizards most Iconic item.

Note I have not plaed a caster until recently I play a Bladebound Magus
which I really like. I find the chichy amount of gold given out really hampers a caster. try buying a 2nd or third level wand with the screwy you can only buy a 50 charge wand rule. thats 11250 gp out of 16500 total gp for a 6th level arcane caster thats just plain stupid. Whom ever sat down and did the wWBL table did not sit down and chat with the person who priced magic items or the person who came up with the screwy you can't craft rule in PFS. Whit is the diffrent between crafting and going to rays wand o matic wand store plundking down your glod and having Ray the mage craft your fully charged wand. Why would ray spend all his time crafting wands for shulb pathfinders to buy?

The simple soultion to this would be to let casters of all sorts craft items for thier personal use no selling or crafting for thier noncaster friends. Why would casters waste thier time crafting items for others to use anyway it takes time from thier arcane or divine study and everyone knows all arcane casters are like the Brain [Pinky and the Brain ] ploting on ways for themselves to rule Golorian. Not toiling away in a dusty dank lab cranking out wands staffs and the like for
for Pathfinders.

You do know that 50 castings of a spell is quite a bit, right? A 20th level wizard can cast 50 spells per day, assuming only a 22-23 Intelligence. That's a lot of spells. Sure, wands aren't as powerful as actually casting the spell, but on the other hand, always having the right utility spell handy is a huge boon. Some spells are perfect for wands.

As for why casters would make things for others, there are any number of reasons.

1) Pride. Some people want to show off what they can do.
2) Survival. Making sure your fighter (pick whatever non-casting class you think is worth playing) buddy has the appropriate weapon increases your chances of survival and success greatly.
3) Profit. Non-adventurers need to eat. This is a good way to make sure you have enough money to live on
4) Orders. Some casters do what they are told. Prisoners, soldiers, followers, etc, all follow orders.

Your overall wealth should include wands with partial charges left. Yes, a fully charged wand with a 4th level spell runs 30,000 gold. However, if you've used half the charges, the GM should only count that as 15,000 gold toward your wealth. Many of the wands that are found don't come fully charged.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Really, if you let a character take a crafting feat then let them use it! otherwise that is a wasted feat (usually on a casting build that doesn't have too many spares). I've never been in a game that didn't allow crafters to make an item at 1/2 market price. It usually works out fine, one character usually picks up several of the feats and then uses downtime / ring of Sustenance and those extra 6 hours a night, to get a fair amount of crafting done. Usually they look to their own needs first, then offer their services to the rest of the party, sometimes at cost, sometimes at 2/3 or even 3/4 market value. There is nothing wrong with this. A character has gained power (wealth) at the cost of a feat, seems reasonable.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

My philosophy is that the WBL table is the recommended value of the player's entire assets. Under this interpretation, you do not get things at half price if you craft them for purposes of WBL. Also this value does not include things that they have previously owned. Finally, it should include things of soft value.

The results of this are as follows. First, crafting does not allow you to break WBL. Crafting merely opens up the magic-mart. This also encourages the usage of consumables, which can be hard at times due to what I have called the "ether" effect. Also it encourages upgrading the same equipment, thereby giving a bit more predictability to the GM. Lastly, the soft value clause is to close the gap created by the first two regarding things such as wishes, permanencies, etc. If a player starts getting wishes from an efreet, just keep track of how many and adjust his WBL accordingly. This also puts things such as spellbooks into play.


Wonder if there's a different way to think about crafting feats.

The Wizard could take Spell Penetration, or Craft Wondrous Item. We all know that Spell Penetration is useful (and leads to Greater Spell Penetration), but what exactly is it that Craft Wondrous Item (or any other item creation feat) do exactly?

I propose working on a benefit to WBL. Going by RAW, what kind of increase should a character see from one of these feats? How much is too much? How little isn't worth a feat?

For example, each feat increasing a characters WBL by 15% is way too much. Increasing by 1% is too little (IMO). Would 5% be okay? Then I'm wondering how this 5% bonus would be used during play, like that character would get a 5% cost reduction only when buying items for himself (though he wouldn't actually be buying, he'd be crafting). Or when the party divides treasure, he mysterious gets an extra 5%. Maybe an extra one-time bump at each feat or level.

How much money would it take for you to give up a feat?


No doubt crafting feats should double WBL, you effectively nerf yourself by taking crafing feats that could otherwise be spent on combat related feats.

The only reason to take the feats is to get better/more gear.

Thankfully my GM's understand this, although one of them don't allow you to craft for other party members. This is understandable I think. One characters feats should not double the gear of everyone in the group. Also one time at high levels in the kingmaker campaign I took it upon myself to make everyones gear, and had to sit out litterally years in game just crafting. Never again, lol


The rules for creating a treasure are not related to WBL, you have a beautiful table with the value of treasure hoards and rules for treasures, and those are actual rules.
So yes, magic item creation feats will allow you to "break" WBL just following the rules, certainly there is no such rule that forces player characters to stick to the expected WBL (which, btw, doesn't mention crafting in the list of factors taken in mind).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

IkeDoe, you're missing the question. Several people are. It's not whether you can craft during the game.

It's whether you can use craft feats to spend 1/2 for each item when starting a new character.

So, for example, a 10th level wizard starts with Craft Wondrous Item. He has 64,000gp. If you allow him to craft pre-start, using starting funds, he could have 128,000gp worth of equipment.

Some of us think that's a bit broken.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
mdt wrote:

IkeDoe, you're missing the question. Several people are. It's not whether you can craft during the game.

It's whether you can use craft feats to spend 1/2 for each item when starting a new character.

So, for example, a 10th level wizard starts with Craft Wondrous Item. He has 64,000gp. If you allow him to craft pre-start, using starting funds, he could have 128,000gp worth of equipment.

Some of us think that's a bit broken.

The RAW clearly don't allow it but then again afaik/remember the RAW have nothing much to say about creation of non first level characters.

In reality this means that it is an area where DM fiat and the basic leveling rules-feats,skills,hp,bab etc./lvl are the only things which apply. If the DM wishes to use WBL then he can, if not he can start you all off completely naked and in chains on your way to the slave block/guillotine.


mdt wrote:

So, for example, a 10th level wizard starts with Craft Wondrous Item. He has 64,000gp. If you allow him to craft pre-start, using starting funds, he could have 128,000gp worth of equipment.

Some of us think that's a bit broken.

I don't. How is that broken when the WBL table itself is only a guideline? In fact you could have the 128K worth of gear in your example even without any feats.

PS. Broken is a way overused word, Pathfinder works just fine


I agree, Morain. I think if GMs wish to mitigate any "brokenness" and yet allow people to have used their feats and skills then simply limit the amount of time a character has to craft. It's a direct limiter on what can potentially be constructed.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The problem with that Buri, is, as I've said before. It's completely arbitrary and capricious. The person who will have had the most time to craft is the one who has the best song and tap dance to the GM.

For all the people who yell and scream on here about GM Fiat, I'm kind of shocked that the solution to keep this houserule from being broken is touted as 'GM Fiat!'.

I'm also shocked that people think giving someone 2x starting wealth at a given level is somehow not broken for the cost of one feat. That makes CWI the most powerful feat in the game.


mdt wrote:
The person who will have had the most time to craft is the one who has the best song and tap dance to the GM.

I still say that encouraging intereaction between the Players and the GM is a Good Thing, as long as any option open to any given player is open to everyone.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
KrispyXIV wrote:
mdt wrote:
The person who will have had the most time to craft is the one who has the best song and tap dance to the GM.
I still say that encouraging intereaction between the Players and the GM is a Good Thing, as long as any option open to any given player is open to everyone.

If a feat is so good everyone takes it, it's too good. When you do this, everyone in the party has to take it to keep up. Except the melee types, because they don't have two feats and a bunch of ranks to spare. Plus they can't do it for CWI, which is where you get the most bang for your buck.

So what you end up with is yet another tilt in the power level of caster over non-caster, since the fighter has to pay full price for all his stuff, and the wizard and druid and cleric for the price of a feat can pay half cost for their equipment.


mdt wrote:

If a feat is so good everyone takes it, it's too good. When you do this, everyone in the party has to take it to keep up. Except the melee types, because they don't have two feats and a bunch of ranks to spare. Plus they can't do it for CWI, which is where you get the most bang for your buck.

So what you end up with is yet another tilt in the power level of caster over non-caster, since the fighter has to pay full price for all his stuff, and the wizard and druid and cleric for the price of a feat can pay half cost for their equipment.

No argument in a general sense. Still, its not been my actual experience of this to be the case; this is quite possibly tied to my typical group. They tend to focus heavily on martial or fighty characters, and our spellcasters tend to be feat starved to the point of crafting feats being a real pain to take.

We've had a couple, but they've tended to always be starved on time, and made considerable effort to spread the benefits around... which resulted in everyone getting an occcasional item at a discount, and no one ever even approaching double wealth.

Pregame though, we dont see it very often, though this may stem from a tendancy to not start at high level.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

It's rarely a problem playing through the levels. Where it's a problem is when you're having someone start a 10th level character, with 64,000gp, and you let them use that craft feat on that 64,000gp.

When you're playing through the levels, you're getting A, B, and C item which are all total worth 15,000gp. You're then selling them for around 7,500gp. Then the crafter takes that 7,500gp and makes 15,000gp worth of equipment out of it. So you're not doubling your money.

This is why you haven't seen an issue with it. I don't have an issue with craft skills being used in game. I love it. I have issues with it being used on starting wealth to double WBL, or at least make a big chunk of it doubled.


I wonder if people understand what a "guideline" is. It's not "this is something we threw together without any thought as to how it impacts things so feel free to ignore it completely." A guideline is, according to the dictionary:

"A statement or other indication of policy or procedure by which to determine a course of action"

or

"a principle put forward to set standards or determine a course of action"

So this whole "it's just a guideline thing" is clearly misunderstood.

Read the Introduction in your Core Rule Book. The part from Monte Cook. He explains that a lot of work went into the Treasure per Encounter (which would directly affect the Wealth by Level). He mentions that Jason and he discussed the purpose of Item Creation feats. Seems like they put a lot of thought into this.

The WBL table is meant to show you roughly how much wealth your characters should have at any given level. It is meant to be fluid so that you can see it change as you progress. You should see some points where your actual wealth is a little lower but overall, you should see a steady climb. It's not like the Base Attack Bonus where you see an immediate change when you level. Your wealth changes slightly but you should generally be within those values.

The feats are not designed to allow you to go beyond this. They are meant to allow you to have the gear you want. There is no punishment when the GM gives out a little less treasure because you've been crafting. Just like it's not a reward when your characters are near death and the GM decides that the next encounter can wait until you've healed a bit. The game is designed to be relatively balanced for all the PCs (that don't intentionally make poor character choices). Casters are already very powerful. Giving them more power (and it's primarily the casters who take these feats) makes that gap too wide.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:

I wonder if people understand what a "guideline" is. It's not "this is something we threw together without any thought as to how it impacts things so feel free to ignore it completely." A guideline is, according to the dictionary:

"A statement or other indication of policy or procedure by which to determine a course of action"

or

"a principle put forward to set standards or determine a course of action"

So this whole "it's just a guideline thing" is clearly misunderstood.

To be clear guidelines are important. However at the same time they don't carry the same weight as, "Wizards cast spells". I read guidelines as, "This is really good advice. You don't have to listen to it, and you can run things how you want... but if you do be ready for stuff to get funky at times and possibly crash on you."

Changing the oil in your car at the prescribed time is a guideline. Not doing it can ruin your car -- but you don't have to do it.


mdt wrote:


If a feat is so good everyone takes it, it's too good. When you do this, everyone in the party has to take it to keep up.

You just described power attack.

Quote:
Except the melee types, because they don't have two feats and a bunch of ranks to spare. Plus they can't do it for CWI, which is where you get the most bang for your buck.

Fighter, Monk, Ranger each get a buttload of feats, meaning they can spare the 1 feat each 3rd level for crafting, def more than wizard or sorcerer or any non "melee types". Rogues can mimic any spell for CWI with a wand, they got enough ranks in UMD for that.

Note that you only need to pick skill points from favored class to afford to max out UMD no matter which class you take, not to mention Trait that makes UMD class skill, adds a +1 unnamed bonus on top, meaning you get a 5 + ability mod for spending a single point in UMD. Ranks are not an issue.

Quote:
So what you end up with is yet another tilt in the power level of caster over non-caster, since the fighter has to pay full price for all his stuff, and the wizard and druid and cleric for the price of a feat can pay half cost for their equipment.

The fighter can use his feats from level, 1 trait, and favored class skill points to mimic any spell he needs and make any items he really wants himself, all while keeping the power attack two handed attack.


mdt wrote:

The problem with that Buri, is, as I've said before. It's completely arbitrary and capricious. The person who will have had the most time to craft is the one who has the best song and tap dance to the GM.

For all the people who yell and scream on here about GM Fiat, I'm kind of shocked that the solution to keep this houserule from being broken is touted as 'GM Fiat!'.

I'm also shocked that people think giving someone 2x starting wealth at a given level is somehow not broken for the cost of one feat. That makes CWI the most powerful feat in the game.

It is arbitrary. However, it's a solution that works in the "real" game world since there is limited amount of time with which to craft, it is friendly with the craft feat and works just the same as it would as if the character had not started at a high level and had naturally crafted the items anyway over the course of several game sessions.

Allowing someone to double or triple their wealth at character creation is the sign of an incompetent GM, truth be told, unless that's the effect they're intentionally going for. It wouldn't happen in a well thought out world or character concept. That's why you should talk to your players. I've played in campaigns where there were role "slots," so to speak. There was a warrior slot, ranged slot, support, healer, etc and players had to pick and choose. There wasn't a problem with this. This tells me people are okay with the concept that there are may be a finite number of roles available and can work with this. If you have a group that squabbles over a group role I would ask if you're playing with 13 year-olds. I've only ever played table-top games with adults so this sort of bickering has never occurred and would be a stretch of my imagination to see how or why it would come up. Having a crafter or two in the group should not totally break your world. If it does, you've not planned properly or should just disallow it outright.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

You're missing that you can't craft with one feat as a fighter or monk or barbarian or rogue or gunslinger.

You have to take two feats. master craftsman, and then one of the crafting feats. And I believe you're restricted to armor and arms crafting, with CWI not allowed.

And as to the argument about 'I can use fighter feats from level 1', show me one, one, fighter feat that gives him 2x WBL.


Tyki11 wrote:
The fighter can use his feats from level, 1 trait, and favored class skill points to mimic any spell he needs and make any items he really wants himself, all while keeping the power attack two handed attack.

What.... what if.... a character had both CWI AND Power Attack?!?

*universe implodes*

O.O

Edit: Hmm, all the crafting feats require a certain caster level as a prereq. Non-casters are teh (intentional) screwed.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Buri,
I am assuming you are misconstruing my argument. I will reiterrate it one more time.

CRAFTING IN GAME, IN CHARACTER, IS NOT AN ISSUE FOR ME, NEVER HAS BEEN, NEVER WILL BE

Crafting in game requires time in game, which can be short of supply, and generally you're selling item A (value 10K) for 5K and then making another 10K item. No increase in WBL.

The only problem I have, that I have ever had, is with the idea that if you are bringing in a 10th level character to a game to replace a dead character for example, that you can get 128K of items by taking one feat, rather than the 64K that's indicated by the WBL table.


mdt wrote:

Buri,

I am assuming you are misconstruing my argument. I will reiterrate it one more time.

CRAFTING IN GAME, IN CHARACTER, IS NOT AN ISSUE FOR ME, NEVER HAS BEEN, NEVER WILL BE

Crafting in game requires time in game, which can be short of supply, and generally you're selling item A (value 10K) for 5K and then making another 10K item. No increase in WBL.

The only problem I have, that I have ever had, is with the idea that if you are bringing in a 10th level character to a game to replace a dead character for example, that you can get 128K of items by taking one feat, rather than the 64K that's indicated by the WBL table.

Um, sure you can get the sort of power scewing unchecked the same way you get most "broken" effects if you focus solely on one thing. However, it makes zero sense to bring a higher level character (higher than 1) who has a crafting as a trained skill or item creation feat and to not have any crafted items. It is my impression you view character creation as a "poof new person in the world" sort of process whereas I view it as a character that has been around the entire time and has a history. As a character with a history they have used their abilities to get where they are. Allowing some time for a few pieces to be created shouldn't be an issue. However, a higher level character has been doing other things beside crafting or else he wouldn't be higher level. Hence, that is why the "they're doubling their WBL" argument makes zero sense. If all they did was craft they would have never gotten passed level 1 as crafting does not award experience but it does allow item creation at a severe discount to the overall item value. Since WBL represents the number of gold pieces a character has to spend then a crafting person should get the full benefit of having those abilities.


Master Craftsman
"Ranks in your chosen skill count as your caster level for the purposes of qualifying for the Craft Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item feats."

He qualifies for CWI.
Spend two traits to gain UMD and Spellcraft as class abilities with an additional unnamed +1. 1 rank makes them 5 + ability modifier.

Wands or other sources can be used to craft CWI and Arms/armor.

High game wbl isn't an issue anyway. Nothing stops one from getting a demiplane scroll or someone to cast it, with time dillution to craft whatever they need while only a day or two passes by in real life.

If 3.5 stuff is allowed, often is, one can pass the work off to one of the Homunculi from Ebberon to continue crafting the item while you go save the world.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I have no issue with them saying that they crafted all their own equipment. I have an issue with them having double wealth. If they'd played up through those 10 levels, then they'd not have double wealth. Since they'd have been selling items, using cash to craft new ones, and netting out to 0. They'd also have been using consumables (wands, potions, scrolls, etc). All of which cost money.

I find your stance the one that is at odds with versamillitude. You're perfectly fine with him doubling wealth, but ignore all the things that should have happened to keep his wealth down to WBL. Things like needing to quaff potions to stay alive. You also treat him as if he had 64,000 gold given to him magically 6 months before, and he was allowed to go craft for the 6 months immediately prior to game, so that he 'poof' appears right at the end of having just crafted his entire life savings worth of gold into equipment.

Now, who's the one ignoring the background of the character and introducing things that don't make sense?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

And in game Tyki, that's fine. Because again, (god I feel like a broken record player). He's selling treasure for 1/2, spending some time, and getting the same value back in equipment.

I don't give a damn about how long it takes him to craft the items. You can craft 365,000 of magic items in a year without missing a single day of adventuring.


That's why you limit time, if you allow it at all. Nothing describes how long it takes to get from one level to another apart from "you level as soon as you have enough experience points to do so." Otherwise, all is described is the amount of gp with which to create the character. Details of the character are between the player and GM. Nothing we say here can hope to dictate how that has to play out at someone else's table. For one character, it could take 20+ years to get to level 10. To the other it could take just a few months. To speculate on these boards as to a particular rule is useless because there's no time requirement to be a certain level. So, the way you correctly limit crafting is to limit the amount of a time a particular character has to craft because that amount of time is unique to each character.


You're saying that it's ok to break WBL in one instance (in game crafting), but not in another instance (pregame). That's a slightly confusing way to argue your opinion, as at one time you tell us it's WBL that's being broken, and is bad.

And in another, that you allow and in fact enjoy it.

Now, you're also factoring in selling.
I've never sold an item I crafted. I either used it, or when it's use ran out, donated it to the guild, or to a Pathfinder Lodge so a rookie Pathfinder could get it.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Ok Buri, but how do you determine who get's how much time? Does Player A get to boost his WBL by 25%, while B get's 45%? and C get's 90%? Why did A, B and C get different amounts? Is it because C is your girlfriend, and you can't pass your finals without help from B?

Tyki,
I don't know how PFS works. Every game I've ever been in, you don't get gold for treasure, you get treasure. Hmmm, I have no use for this 10,000gp +2 Flaming Frosting Trident of tuna summoning. I'll go sell it to the fishermen's guild for 5,000gp. Then I'll take that 5,000 gp and craft a +2 bow of dear summoning. No increase in WBL because I sold 10, got 5, crafted, and got 10.

That's what I said earlier.


Abraham spalding wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

I wonder if people understand what a "guideline" is. It's not "this is something we threw together without any thought as to how it impacts things so feel free to ignore it completely." A guideline is, according to the dictionary:

"A statement or other indication of policy or procedure by which to determine a course of action"

or

"a principle put forward to set standards or determine a course of action"

So this whole "it's just a guideline thing" is clearly misunderstood.

To be clear guidelines are important. However at the same time they don't carry the same weight as, "Wizards cast spells". I read guidelines as, "This is really good advice. You don't have to listen to it, and you can run things how you want... but if you do be ready for stuff to get funky at times and possibly crash on you."

Changing the oil in your car at the prescribed time is a guideline. Not doing it can ruin your car -- but you don't have to do it.

That's exactly my point. The people I had to post that for are the ones using the word "guideline" as "random number with little to no meaning." In other words, they just ignore it when it suits them.


I've tried to stay out of this beyond my only comment of a relevant example as the other thread escalated out of control. But it seems the same people are in this thread arguing the same thing. Was hoping for different people with fresher views but it's not gonna happen.

mdt wrote:

The problem with that Buri, is, as I've said before. It's completely arbitrary and capricious. The person who will have had the most time to craft is the one who has the best song and tap dance to the GM.

For all the people who yell and scream on here about GM Fiat, I'm kind of shocked that the solution to keep this houserule from being broken is touted as 'GM Fiat!'.

I'm also shocked that people think giving someone 2x starting wealth at a given level is somehow not broken for the cost of one feat. That makes CWI the most powerful feat in the game.

Choosing to give a 0% increase is just as arbitrary as choosing a 100% increase. With no rules specifically stated it is GM discretion on how they run it. Reasonably a 10-20% increase could be applied to co-inside with the Wealthy Character concept of the DMG. This also takes into account that in the adventuring career you're finding items that are exchanged 1:1, items that a character keeps while adventuring, and the liquid gold asset. Yes it's weird that some people would allow this to double WBL. No it's not outside the rules as everyone has said that WBL is merely a guideline. This creates more work for the GM but to each their own.

mdt wrote:
If a feat is so good everyone takes it, it's too good. When you do this, everyone in the party has to take it to keep up. Except the melee types, because they don't have two feats and a bunch of ranks to spare. Plus they can't do it for CWI, which is where you get the most bang for your buck.

Why is it that all melee classes will choose power attack or weapon finesse? Or Weapon Focus for that matter. They are feats that are directly affected by their main stat or class. Arguing the value of a feat makes it obsolete or over powered will ruin more feats than you take into account. Why does greater weapon focus require fighter levels when fighters already have full BAB and weapon training that puts them well ahead of everyone else. Was no one else in history allowed to get exceptionally well with their weapon skills because they weren't a fighter?

mdt wrote:

It's rarely a problem playing through the levels. Where it's a problem is when you're having someone start a 10th level character, with 64,000gp, and you let them use that craft feat on that 64,000gp.

When you're playing through the levels, you're getting A, B, and C item which are all total worth 15,000gp. You're then selling them for around 7,500gp. Then the crafter takes that 7,500gp and makes 15,000gp worth of equipment out of it. So you're not doubling your money.

This is why you haven't seen an issue with it. I don't have an issue with craft skills being used in game. I love it. I have issues with it being used on starting wealth to double WBL, or at least make a big chunk of it doubled.

Power/item distribution in any standard party tends to be that you find treasure, if a member can use it great, if members can't, it gets sold and the money distributed equally unless someone has been taking a portion of the treasure in items and shouldn't get the gold. With gold being a treasure equally spread amongst a party the crafter has the advantage of turning it into greater material wealth due to only having to pay the 1/2 base value plus time.

Treating it like getting A,B,C items worth x and you sell for x/2 doesn't hold as that's a statement true for everyone. The fighter also can only sell for x/2. He then buys at full market value and loses wealth since he's been selling to get the funds needed. The crafter maintains the average by using his skills to get the new items at x/2.

Bob_Loblaw wrote:

I wonder if people understand what a "guideline" is. It's not "this is something we threw together without any thought as to how it impacts things so feel free to ignore it completely." A guideline is, according to the dictionary:

"A statement or other indication of policy or procedure by which to determine a course of action"

or

"a principle put forward to set standards or determine a course of action"

So this whole "it's just a guideline thing" is clearly misunderstood.

Read the Introduction in your Core Rule Book. The part from Monte Cook. He explains that a lot of work went into the Treasure per Encounter (which would directly affect the Wealth by Level). He mentions that Jason and he discussed the purpose of Item Creation feats. Seems like they put a lot of thought into this.

The WBL table is meant to show you roughly how much wealth your characters should have at any given level. It is meant to be fluid so that you can see it change as you progress. You should see some points where your actual wealth is a little lower but overall, you should see a steady climb. It's not like the Base Attack Bonus where you see an immediate change when you level. Your wealth changes slightly but you should generally be within those values.

The feats are not designed to allow you to go beyond this. They are meant to allow you to have the gear you want. There is no punishment when the GM gives out a little less treasure because you've been crafting. Just like it's not a reward when your characters are near death and the GM decides that the next encounter can wait until you've healed a bit. The game is designed to be relatively balanced for all the PCs (that don't intentionally make poor character choices). Casters are already very powerful. Giving them more power (and it's primarily the casters who take these feats) makes that gap too wide.

You're right, there is weight to a guideline. But that still doesn't mean that a guideline has to be adhered to. And if your statements from the CRB are to hold true then the developers also took into account the ability to gain money through crafting. I can't imagine they were so blind that they over looked a basic mechanic. Some games can be richer, some games can be poorer, and some games can be juuuuust right. All of these examples are GM discretion on how he chooses to run his campgains and will be controlled by the GM to maintain this.

Most of the statements in the book come with the 'In general' or 'Under the assumption' line that unfortunately means in general and under the assumption. These statements do not include every case by their very nature. Saying that you have to be within the guidelines of the WBL table implies more emphasis on the table to be a rule and not a guideline. This is also GM fiat since we've already said that guidelines are not rules and do not need to be adhered to.

In your last line you've also chosen to make a general statemet.

Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Giving them more power (and it's primarily the casters who take these feats) makes that gap too wide.

Everyone can take the craft feats and pull this same stunt. It's not something where a caster can pull ahead while the melee's can't. The melee's can take the feats and keep pace with the casters. Sure they have to jump through more hoops needing one additional feat and the skill ranks to go along with it, but oddly enough it's the melee classes that get those wonderful bonus feats that caster's don't get and can so afford them. Caster's have more ease with this feat line because they already have the primary necessity for it. Magic.

I'm sure this page will continue for 8 more pages of nightmarish rules lawyering like the last. In practice, crafting does net a character more wealth than others over time. It'll be up to the GM to decide how much of his actual wealth he thinks the character could have had with the potential of doubling it. If it's 0% like you want, it could just as easily be 50%. Maybe they found their weapon worth 18000gp, and the armor for 16000gp. Already that's 34000gp of that 62000gp for a level 10. Leaves the player with 28000gp to craft with. Still seems like a lot and they probably would have found a few more items they kept. The rules for wealthy characters in the DMG seem to have a fitting 10-20% increase to WBL that could apply here and keeps things fairly reasonable.

Not everyone was created equally. Nor should every character be treated that way. YMMV.


Ok, that was my bad, I wrongly assumed you meant somehow reselling crafted items for profit.

Tho the problem still remains, for me anyhow, that you're okey with WBL being broken after game starts, at a slower place(depending on lvl and other variables).

But it being broken sooner is bad.

On a different note, I already showed how easy it is to meet CWI requirements, the 'boost' to wbl is open to anyone who bothers to want it, playing no favorites between casters or non-casters.


mdt wrote:
Ok Buri, but how do you determine who get's how much time? Does Player A get to boost his WBL by 25%, while B get's 45%? and C get's 90%? Why did A, B and C get different amounts? Is it because C is your girlfriend, and you can't pass your finals without help from B?

If you make decisions like that while GMing? You don't deserve to be a GM. That decision process should be performed by discussions between the player and GM with the GM making a final decision that fits with that character and the campaign. Apart from that, it's pure speculation.


mdt wrote:

I don't know how PFS works. Every game I've ever been in, you don't get gold for treasure, you get treasure. Hmmm, I have no use for this 10,000gp +2 Flaming Frosting Trident of tuna summoning. I'll go sell it to the fishermen's guild for 5,000gp. Then I'll take that 5,000 gp and craft a +2 bow of dear summoning. No increase in WBL because I sold 10, got 5, crafted, and got 10.

That's what I said earlier.

Never get gold for treasure?!

Now I'll be the first to admit, the majority of value in treasure I've seen tends to come in the form of +2 FFToTS, but a significant portion also tends to be in gold and valuables. Maybe 10-20% at least? Sometimes more?

Its definately a hugely valid point you're making though; even time notwithstanding, the amount of profit-via-crafting is directly related to the amount you can loot in valuables versus loot in items.


Food for thought:
Fighter | Wizard skill amount is the same.
Fighter gets one feat at 1st, one at 2nd, and then one each other level.
Wizard gets scribe at 1st, then one each fifth level.

If fighter went for CWI. He'd have Master Craftsman at 1st, CWI at 3rd.
That leaves racial bonus feat, if any, and two fighter feats at 3rd level.

If wizard did the same, he'd have racial bonus feat, if any, and a single lvl feat.

So no, caster is not the better crafter.
Note that the fighter example applies to monks, rangers, cavalier, gunslinger, and even rogue, as they can trade talents for combat feats.


Tyki11 wrote:

Food for thought:

Fighter | Wizard skill amount is the same.
Fighter gets one feat at 1st, one at 2nd, and then one each other level.
Wizard gets scribe at 1st, then one each fifth level.

If fighter went for CWI. He'd have Master Craftsman at 1st, CWI at 3rd.
That leaves racial bonus feat, if any, and two fighter feats at 3rd level.

If wizard did the same, he'd have racial bonus feat, if any, and a single lvl feat.

So no, caster is not the better crafter.
Note that the fighter example applies to monks, rangers, cavalier, gunslinger, and even rogue, as they can trade talents for combat feats.

This would be true IF Master Craftsman didn't require 5 skill ranks and only apply to one skill (meaning unless your Craft is particularly broad, you're going to have to do some convincing to get full use out of something like CWI out of it).


KrispyXIV wrote:
Tyki11 wrote:

Food for thought:

Fighter | Wizard skill amount is the same.
Fighter gets one feat at 1st, one at 2nd, and then one each other level.
Wizard gets scribe at 1st, then one each fifth level.

If fighter went for CWI. He'd have Master Craftsman at 1st, CWI at 3rd.
That leaves racial bonus feat, if any, and two fighter feats at 3rd level.

If wizard did the same, he'd have racial bonus feat, if any, and a single lvl feat.

So no, caster is not the better crafter.
Note that the fighter example applies to monks, rangers, cavalier, gunslinger, and even rogue, as they can trade talents for combat feats.

This would be true IF Master Craftsman didn't require 5 skill ranks and only apply to one skill (meaning unless your Craft is particularly broad, you're going to have to do some convincing to get full use out of something like CWI out of it).

Why do I always miss those things while tired?

Fine, you're right. So now he has to be 5th or higher to pull this combo off. Which is a 2 lvl higher than I first said.

We just so happen to get a feat at 3rd level (6 ranks), and one later that can be spent on CWI.
If using Re-Training rules for higher level character(3rd or higher), then my example still stands.

Tho, master craftsman does not specify that you need a specific skill for a specific item. In case of CWI, wording says you use the skill linked to the feat for making them. It makes zero distiction between skill picked and items made by CWI.


Tyki11 wrote:
Stuff about Martial Crafting

I once had a monk-crafter in a group I ran. The feat cost was huge, and he got to have fun justifying how everything he made was made of metal, but he loved that character. It would have been easier on him if he were a caster though, for sure.


Non-Caster pay one more feat than any caster-crafter, but they retain the ability to multiclass AND keep full caster level for crafting (full ranks).

But that balances out by them receiving their most needed feats as free bonus stuff, in addition to class features.

Reading more into MC, they don't need spellcraft either, meaning with 1 trait they have 5 points in UMD not counting ability mod.

The only class I can think of, melee type, not getting this as easy, would be barbarian?


There is a trait that exists to increase starting wealth: Rich Parents. Rich Parents effectively increases your starting WBL by one level.* If a feat is worth two traits, then we could say that one feat is worth twice what Rich Parents is...or something close to +2 to your WBL score.

Crafting feats offer additional benefits above our doubled trait. That is, they:

- Benefit the PC by increasing their wealth
- Benefit the PC by allowing them items customized to their character
- Benefit the PC by allowing them a greater selection of available items

Here is part of the stumbling block. If we want to use an existing guideline such as Rich Parents, then what do we do with the other benefits? How do they measure in comparison?

Defining the intent of the feats would be helpful--that is, sitting down with the developers around the coffee table and ask about the feats' intent.

That is, are the crafting feats intended as +wealth, or are they +customization, or +options? This intent is often at the heart of disagreements.

This conversation may be different than one they'd had a year ago--Pathfinder has made changes, especially with Master Craftsman, and today they would have the benefit of that experience.

* It's close. You begin with 900 at 1st. 2nd begins with 1000.

1 to 50 of 1,112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / How was the Wealth by Level chart constructed? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.