Crafting a magic item costs time and gold, and per the PRD the sale price for PCs is generally the break-even cost of crafting. Crafting to sell essentially means you spend time to make zero gold profit. Without resorting to a combination of tricks that are only doable at very high level and GM cooperation, there is no way for a PC to "job" the core magic item creation rules.
There was (and still is) no need to put together a more convoluted and page-filling set of magic item creation rules in the Pathfinder Core Rulebook in an effort to prevent every loophole imaginable.
You know, if you liked the 3.5 XP rules, you can still use them.And watch as people don't play with you. Personally I didnt mind level draining monsters as they could affect the whole party but I disliked the whole xp for spells/items mechanic.
*shrug*
His premise is reinstating a rule that is disliked by many. I figured he wouldn't mind an empty table while he's at it.
You know, if you liked the 3.5 XP rules, you can still use them.And watch as people don't play with you. Personally I didnt mind level draining monsters as they could affect the whole party but I disliked the whole xp for spells/items mechanic.
I think it's right up there with Elves can't be a Cavalier and the like. That's a rule that my 2e group tossed out immediately. I was nice to see it officially removed in 3.x. Same goes for PF and item creation rules.
In the interest of fairness - play however you like, right?
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
XP is an abstract numerical measurement of the character's past experiences, providing an indicator of when they have overcome enough challenges that they have learned how to be more skilled at doing what they do.
It's a strictly metagame concept, like Challenge Rating or squares on the battle grid. It's something that players keep track of using a quantitative abstraction, but that their characters perceive as qualitative reality.
This means that characters do not know how many experience points they have.
You see that bold part there? That's very important. That's why I bolded it.
Experience isn't life force. And it most certainly is not a form of currency that the character can spend on stuff.
Fortunately, there actually *is* a currency that can be spent on things. It's built right into the game already, and it can be used to balance the crafting mechanics. It's called Gold Pieces.
If you think the it's too cheap to craft items under the Pathfinder rules, boost up the Gold costs. Or just give your players less Gold to work with.
With such a simple solution, why instead would you want to transform Experience into a whole secondary currency? Why break the metagame wall with it? Why incur all of the numerous other problems that have already been mentioned in this thread?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And what do you want them to do now that they have remodeled the game, with extensive play-testing as well, changed every spell with xp costs, changed the way negative levels work, etc.
Do you expect them to suddenly invalidate everything they have printed (as opposed to what some other company printed). Rush out a new version of the CRB to everyone who has one?
You don't like this change. Point taken. House rule it and move on.
I never liked how 3rd edition got rid of weapon speeds, but it does simplify the game and speed up combat.
There are advantages to the change they made. You may not think they are worth the trade off, but all things in life are a matter of compromise and balance. You have to give to take.
|
"Because of Money, the Alchemist is the only character that keeps improving when others reach their max. 50,000 gold per month is nothing to shake a stick at. Other casters may be able to cast Wish, but the Alchemist Doppleganger Simulacrum make him about as unkillable as any other caster. Greater Alchemical Simulacrum means you can put that Gold to immediate crafting use and make your own alchemical army."
This was written by another poster in another thread so I don't really know if this can be done but 50,000 gp a month is crazy.
Please consider providing links when you post things out of context, as written ... notmuch there really.
|
|
Please consider providing links when you post things out of context, as written ... notmuch there really."Because of Money, the Alchemist is the only character that keeps improving when others reach their max. 50,000 gold per month is nothing to shake a stick at. Other casters may be able to cast Wish, but the Alchemist Doppleganger Simulacrum make him about as unkillable as any other caster. Greater Alchemical Simulacrum means you can put that Gold to immediate crafting use and make your own alchemical army."
This was written by another poster in another thread so I don't really know if this can be done but 50,000 gp a month is crazy.
It comes from that same top 5 powerful classes thread that was moved to advice.
|
|
So your excuse is because most games don't go that high? Good god, where are you getting your information from. Our games always go to 20 and I know lots of other people who's games go to 20.
So if the Tarrasque was broken all to hell then it's okay because PC's rarely ever run into one?
Ok, what are you doing at level 20 ? What are you doing with your infinite gold trick ? Where are the shops that take your kingdom-level amount of treasures regularly ? Where are the guys who will want to get this money for themselves ?
Level 20 game is NOT balanced, nor intended and designed to be. It isn't even intended to be from the big bosses's words themselves, as they also design rules that are voluntarily sub-par and unbalanced with the rest (ho hai vow of poverty). And using the tarrasque - renowned as being the biggest badass invulnerable monster in D&D - as an example isn't going to help. That's not for nothing that people ask for epic rules and that Paizo answered that they would do handle it with a totally different system than just "here is how to go from level 20 to 40 hurr" crap.
Pathfinder works this way. Designers don't balance level 20 because no one cares. Or at least, not those that really matter in the business process.
Deal with it and houserule as much as needed, it's rule 0 for you on a silver plate.
|
|
And what do you want them to do now that they have remodeled the game, with extensive poay-testing as well, changed every spell with xp costs, changed the way negative levels work, etc.
Do you expect them to suddenly invalidate everything they have printed (as opposed to what some other company printed). Rush out a new version of the CRB to everyone who has one?
You don't like this change. Point taken. House rule it and move on.
I never liked how 3rd edition got rid of weapon speeds, but it does simplify the game and speed up combat.There are advantages to the change they made. You may not think they are worth the trade off, but all things in life are a matter of compromise and balance. You have to give to take.
Not sure why the game has to be remodeled in the first place. What does level loss have to do with it anyway? You never lost XP unless it became permanent. You could always have level loss but it's gone after 24 hours and it can never be permanent.
So what you are saying is if a broken element in the game is found, it shouldn't be changed because of fear what might happen to the other rules because of the change?
Nothing in the game rules about magic item availability prevents him from going to a sufficiently large city (huuuuuuuuge in this case) and just buy a staff or order it from a caster. That is RAW and if you don't follow that rule - which is fair game IMO - than thats rule 0 too.
Shallowsoul, this response from Sebastian is truly inspired. Let me tell you why:
A Commoner with a single rank in Craft-woodworking can create Ladders. He spends whatever amount of time he needs to make a ladder, because, as you point out, Shallowsoul, crafting and selling are unbounded by RAW. Our level 1 commoner can craft and sell enough ladders to purchase ANY magic item he wants, costing no XP, even if you got your wish of having XP costs in the game. As you say, there is no Rule 0, so there is no DM restricting this strategy.
Therefore a level 1 commoner with a rank in a Craft skill is broken, can have unlimited wealth, and have unlimited magic items.
See how absurd it gets when you ignore Rule 0? Even your XP cost solution is meaningless and zero deterrent to the acquisition of vast wealth and magic.
Ok, what are you doing at level 20 ?
Anything I want!
I wonder; is it safe to assume that lots of people play through Adeventure Paths? If so, then logically, if they complete the AP, their characters will be somewhere between 16th and 17th level?
This was written by another poster in another thread so I don't really know if this can be done but 50,000 gp a month is crazy.
How much money is he likely to make adventuring in a month? He's probably clearing 1/5 of that per encounter and that's on the slow track. 50,000 gp once a month for turning half a ton of lead (whatever that costs in raw materials) to gold? If that's his income in a month, that's a dip in income.
Pathfinder is NOT a serious economic simulation. These are characters at the fairly extreme ends of power. Most practical concerns about money are behind them.
Once you're at that level, time remains a major factor. Want to craft that staff of wishes that has a market value in over 1 million gold pieces for the material component alone? Have a nice 3.5 years of daily crafting time in which you cannot cast wish while everybody else is out adventuring, because if you try to go do it while adventuring it'll probably take you 7 years.
Most people don't finish adventure paths.
It's rare to find a group of human beings who can commit to anything for that long, much less with the time and money to do so. This is why book sales decrease for each issue (or so I recall hearing) in an AP, the first issue always sells the most.
Wow, 109 posts in two and half hours. Someone feels strongly about something.
I have played magic item crafters in 3.5, using strict xp rules (of course for certain spells also), and I have played magic item crafters in pathfinder. It never bothered me that it cost xp, that was just the way it was, just added a little extra book-keeping. I don't mind now that it no longer costs xp, just removes a little extra book-keeping.
Players who exploit the rules to a "broken" state will always exploit the rules, and if it is not crafting, then it will be something else (I think we have seen plenty of ways to break the system on these forums that I don't need to cite them.)
Most people don't finish adventure paths.
It's rare to find a group of human beings who can commit to anything for that long, much less with the time and money to do so. This is why book sales decrease for each issue (or so I recall hearing) in an AP, the first issue always sells the most.
I played in (and finished) Second Darkness with largely the same group of guys who started it (we lost 1 and added 2 in). People in my current game (but in a different group) have completed both Carrion Crown and Rise of The Rune Lords. I realize that's anecdotal evidence and so it's not completely reliable.
I guess my point was that really, I don't think many people get to 20th, unless they stared higher up to begin with.
|
|
"Because of Money, the Alchemist is the only character that keeps improving when others reach their max. 50,000 gold per month is nothing to shake a stick at. Other casters may be able to cast Wish, but the Alchemist Doppleganger Simulacrum make him about as unkillable as any other caster. Greater Alchemical Simulacrum means you can put that Gold to immediate crafting use and make your own alchemical army."
This was written by another poster in another thread so I don't really know if this can be done but 50,000 gp a month is crazy.
At level 20 the Alchemist gets a really powerfull capstone ability called Grand Discovery, you have to chose and one or your choices is this:
Philosopher’s Stone
Prerequisite: Grand discovery
Benefit: The alchemist learns how to create a philosopher's stone, and can do so once per month at no cost. Creating a philosopher's stone takes 1 day of work.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/artifacts/minor-artifacts/philosopher-s -stone
I would rather be immortal, but it's a nice cash cow. So if this level of crazy does bother you maybe consider arguing about the capstone abilities. Unless you allow custom crafting I seen no real disadvantage here, they just changed 1 XP to 5 gold, which IIRC was the same ammount you had to pay if you paid a spellcaster to cast wish for you (in addition to he usual spellcasting fee).
So what you are saying is if a broken element in the game is found, it shouldn't be changed because of fear what might happen to the other rules because of the change?
I think selgard has given you a very well stated argument (twice) that RAW involves DM judgement. I don't think you've found a broken element - some guy has told you (erroneously, in my view) that he can make a staff of 60 wishes a day or something.
Suppose the rules were changed to bring back xp loss. What are you going to say to the player who insists he can have a ring of true strike by RAW? Why can't that same argument be used to rebut the wish-factory?
Most people don't finish adventure paths.
It's rare to find a group of human beings who can commit to anything for that long, much less with the time and money to do so. This is why book sales decrease for each issue (or so I recall hearing) in an AP, the first issue always sells the most.
I played in (and finished) Second Darkness with largely the same group of guys who started it (we lost 1 and added 2 in). People in my current game (but in a different group) have completed both Carrion Crown and Rise of The Rune Lords. I realize that's anecdotal evidence and so it's not completely reliable.
I guess my point was that really, I don't think many people get to 20th, unless they stared higher up to begin with.
Even on the fast tract, you would need to start at the level you are normally supposed to end with.
And Shallowsoul, that is a very very fitting username.
And Shallowsoul, that is a very very fitting username.
Yeah he seems a bit shallow :p
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So what you are saying is if a broken element in the game is found, it shouldn't be changed because of fear what might happen to the other rules because of the change?
You seem to be the only person that finds a loophole requiring a 20th level character working tacitly with GM approval to purchase a massive volume of raw diamonds, fabricate it into an even more massive pile of diamond dust, spend 3.5 years of in-game downtime to craft a staff of wish and then pwn the world to be such a likely encountered game-breaker that they should rewrite a significant portion of the core rules just to go back to a crafting model the vast majority of players hated. That scenario is such an outlier it fails any sort of valid risk assessment.
The magic item crafting rules explicitly state that any custom item requires GM approval. This is not a design flaw, and requiring GM approval is not the same as rule 0.
|
|
Uhhhhh wut??!! Not supposed to be balanced at level 20? Where are you coming up with this stuff, seriously?
Level 20 game is NOT balanced, nor intended and designed to be.
Because the wizard and fighter at level 20 are totally designed to stand on equal foot, sure.
Also, all options in the game are voluntarily balanced and made so everyone wins.If you want every option to be mechanically equal, you need to play a different game.
;)
|
|
Ok, what are you doing at level 20 ?Anything I want!
I wonder; is it safe to assume that lots of people play through Adventure Paths? If so, then logically, if they complete the AP, their characters will be somewhere between 16th and 17th level?
Usually, I think paizo learned from past mistakes already, when it comes to the capstone abilities. The Magus Capstone is anything but game changing and I would argue that the APG classes are rather tame too - the Alchemist can create hard cash.. that's certainly nice
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I would like to commend all the folks posting in this thread, who have been patient and haven't let shallowsoul's aggression bait them into snarky comments. Thanks, guys.
Shallowsoul, people have pointed out that staves in Pathfinder have 10 charges, no more and no less. And they need to be powered by a caster who casts the requisite spells, once a day, into them.
An object that can 60 wish spells would be a rod, or more likely a wondrous item. In either case, the pricing guidelines put the item above the 200,000 gp thresh-hold for artifacts. So we're talking about somebody making an artifact. Those necessarily use "epic-level" rules, not mere item crafting guidelines. And those epic-level rules haven't been written yet.
Under that reasoning, doesn't the active cooperation of the GM seem like a good idea to you?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Uh, if a player is abusing the rules tell them to stop?
XP costs didn't "balance" item creation they simply discouraged it.
Feat Tax, Time Tax, Gold Tax AND XP Tax? Just not worth the bother.
I use the item creation rules AS WRITTEN, in Kingmaker, a game with virtually unlimited crafting time. My game is running grandly. Because if a player tries to abuse the rules I simply say: "No"... TADA!
If you want the rule in your games go ahead, but being obnoxious about it and arguing with the devs after they kindly answered your question is going overboard bro.
Ok, I see some name calling going on here. I am an acerbic poster, and probably top the list of posts removed because the moderators considered them non-constructive or incendiary, but name-calling is just rude, and only belittles yourself.
That said, call me anything you like. I prefer self-deprecating humour, and you might give me some good material.
So what you are saying is if a broken element in the game is found, it shouldn't be changed because of fear what might happen to the other rules because of the change?
An element of a game is only broken if it genuinely doesn't work, making magic item creation more readily available to everyone, and removing xp cost from magic item creation, makes the rules as is work better than keeping them. Especially with how incredibly counter-intuitive xp costs on magic items is.
What you are complaining about is a poorly-conceived notion of imbalance. Fact of the matter is feats are a very limited resource, spending one to just be able to build an item is very expensive, especially since it's only one type of item, and then you still have to spend time and money. Finally, adding XP to the cost is more than a little ridiculous. A feat, money, time, and experience points is a ridiculous cost for what is usually a minor upgrade.
|
|
Uhhhhh wut??!! Not supposed to be balanced at level 20? Where are you coming up with this stuff, seriously?
Level 20 game is NOT balanced, nor intended and designed to be.Because the wizard and fighter at level 20 are totally designed to stand on equal foot, sure.
Also, all options in the game are voluntarily balanced and made so everyone wins.If you want every option to be mechanically equal, you need to play a different game.;)
After getting the AP of the current adventure path I really consider playing an AP as a Magus with a bokken... the fact that I do own 2 and usually toy arround with them while we play is ....^^
My Magus alrady has a black katana so this ... is an almost valid excuse.
Shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to character optimization can be fun ^^
Instead of XP to create, XP to use?
Instead of XP to create, XP to use?
That makes even less sense.
|
|
Instead of XP to create, XP to use?
I remember the movie, does that rule come with riding fluffy dog dragons, smashing hollow soldiers and reading books in attics ? Damn it I can`t remember how the movie ended, but giving away your memories for magical effects doesn't seem like a smart choice. Unless you could decide, there are certainly some stories I would love to forget.
I remember the movie, does that rule come with riding fluffy dog dragons, smashing hollow soldiers and reading books in attics ? Damn it I can`t remember how the movie ended, but giving away your memories for magical effects doesn't seem like a smart choice. Unless you could decide, there are certainly some stories I would love to forget.Instead of XP to create, XP to use?
If it were selective, that would be awesome. I mean, when I was a teenager, my bedroom used to be right underneath my parents' ... can I please forget those 2 years?
If you pay attention to the wealth by level tables when writing your own adventures you will not run into any problems with item creation, so it is a non needed penalty to charge xp to craft. Gold and Time are more than enough, when you use Wealth per level as a guide.
Wow. This thread is a train wreck. Can't believe I read most of this. For starters I am neutral here.
I would like to say that about 30 or 40 people said the exact same thing with different wording and everyone is getting all mad at one dude's opinion. He's not saying the rule is wrong, he's saying he doesn't like it. Live and let die.
Most people don't finish adventure paths.
It's rare to find a group of human beings who can commit to anything for that long, much less with the time and money to do so. This is why book sales decrease for each issue (or so I recall hearing) in an AP, the first issue always sells the most.
My group must be weird then...we are finishing up Carrion Crown on book 3 of Jade Regent, and finishing up book 2 of Council of Thieves, we plan on finishing those then moving on to Serpent Crown and Skull and Shackles.
My game group loves APs and they make our GM's lives much easier.
We'll be finishing up volume 1 of Carrion Crown at the next game (I think), and that will have taken about 6 months real time. Now, I think they're getting their act together a bit more now than at the beginning, but at that rate it'll take us about 2 1/2 years to finish.
Personally, I think how well a group sticks with it depends more on the GM than the group. It takes a lot of work to run a game.
</derail>
As far as the whole XP thing, I was originally against removing it, but then I realized my opinion was based on my wholesale import of Pathfinder rules into a 3.5e game.
In a purely Pathfinder game, having no XP costs makes perfect sense, so long as they never never ever add a feat like Ignore Material Components. Once you do that, no-XP spells become free and that's crazy talk.
Kind of like how I was originally annoyed by the removal of "you lose spells when you're hit with level drain" thing went away ... I realized that my annoyance was because it made that cool Spell Drain feat from Libris Mortis useless ... another fact irrelevant to a pure Pathfinder game.
Uhhhhh wut??!! Not supposed to be balanced at level 20? Where are you coming up with this stuff, seriously?
Level 20 game is NOT balanced, nor intended and designed to be.
With a game as complex as pathfinder, with as many play styles as exist, it is simply impossible to balance all factors against eachother. There is literally an infinate number of characters that can be created, parties that can be combined, adventures that can be run, stories that can be told. It is not possible to balance all of these against one another objectively.
High level play (above levle 14) is not objectively balanced in pathfinder. For a source I choose all threads on this board that contain the phrases 'high level play' and 'martial/caster disparity'. For everyone but you, crafting is the least of the worries a dm has to contend with when dealing with a level 20 party.
The designers of this game looked at thier fan base and its demand. They realized that normally, their bread and butter (adventures) sell best at lower levels. According to sales figures on these products the majority of games happen at low levels. While many groups do play at high levels, most also play at low levels, and high level adventures simply dont sell well. High level play (post 14th level) is a major minority of the overall game time of the game. Given the discussion here on the boards, the E6 movement, the constant requests for 'low fantasy' and 'low magic' games, it is safe to agree with the asumption the most of gameplay happens bellow 14th level or so.
To that end the devs framed their choices when making changes to the game. That includes magic item creation. Their primary concern was not 20th level since they didnt have a solution for 20th level balance in general in the first place. Much of what was changed does nothing to improve high level play, but does lots for low level play, including the creation rules. XP costs hurt a heck of alot more when you are at 4th level then they do at 20.
You are also incorrect about paizo's design philosophy. It goes back to that infinate possibility issue again. You cannot have a game with rules as complex and robust as those in pathfinder without exploits. It doesnt work that way. It is literally impossible to do. Paizo designs rules with the assumption that there will be a GM to adjudicate them. If you want to play a strict raw game, you are playing the wrong game with the wrong company at the helm. Because there are so many different playstyles, so many different rules and so many ways to play the game, paizo settles on 'best fit' rules, and gives explicite permission for DMs to make changes to suit their needs. James' response to your post is the perfect evidence for that.
If that approach isn't good enough for you, and you want written in stone rules to fix every problem, you are simply in the wrong place.
Just what the title says. Why was XP cost eliminated from certain spells and magic item creation. I always thought it was a great way to keep things in check but now the DM really has to watch how much gold he gives out and keep an eye on the players if they try and find ways to exploit getting massive amounts of gold. I think they should bring back this rule.
Are there trust issues within your group that require so much oversight to prevent abuse?
I have GMed a fair amount of campaigns now, and most have had 1 or 2 players craft magic items.
Not once have I had to deal with abuse. The time constraints are the biggest obstacle, and with the PCs busy with that whole adventuring stuff, there isn't pools of downtime.
I would suggest trying the rules as written out first, as your concern may be for nothing.
I just think speculating that players MAY try to exploit the rules, and basing this speculation on other threads that go above and beyond to TRY to exploit item creation is a stress that probably won't serve any purpose.
|
|
Just what the title says. Why was XP cost eliminated from certain spells and magic item creation. I always thought it was a great way to keep things in check but now the DM really has to watch how much gold he gives out and keep an eye on the players if they try and find ways to exploit getting massive amounts of gold. I think they should bring back this rule.Are there trust issues within your group that require so much oversight to prevent abuse?
I have GMed a fair amount of campaigns now, and most have had 1 or 2 players craft magic items.
Not once have I had to deal with abuse. The time constraints are the biggest obstacle, and with the PCs busy with that whole adventuring stuff, there isn't pools of downtime.
I would suggest trying the rules as written out first, as your concern may be for nothing.
I just think speculating that players MAY try to exploit the rules, and basing this speculation on other threads that go above and beyond to TRY to exploit item creation is a stress that probably won't serve any purpose.
They do it on these boards all the time. I'm not say that each and every loophole will be found and taken care of but there was already a means in place that stopped the abuse in this department. You never could spend more XP to drop you a level and you didn't want to be too far behind so you crafted your items carefully and you didn't go overboard.
I think someone mentioned since it's an ability that people should be able to use it, that's fine and all but Gate, Wish, Miracle are all spells that classes get but they are still kept in check.
|
|
Uhhhhh wut??!! Not supposed to be balanced at level 20? Where are you coming up with this stuff, seriously?
Level 20 game is NOT balanced, nor intended and designed to be.With a game as complex as pathfinder, with as many play styles as exist, it is simply impossible to balance all factors against eachother. There is literally an infinate number of characters that can be created, parties that can be combined, adventures that can be run, stories that can be told. It is not possible to balance all of these against one another objectively.
High level play (above levle 14) is not objectively balanced in pathfinder. For a source I choose all threads on this board that contain the phrases 'high level play' and 'martial/caster disparity'. For everyone but you, crafting is the least of the worries a dm has to contend with when dealing with a level 20 party.
The designers of this game looked at thier fan base and its demand. They realized that normally, their bread and butter (adventures) sell best at lower levels. According to sales figures on these products the majority of games happen at low levels. While many groups do play at high levels, most also play at low levels, and high level adventures simply dont sell well. High level play (post 14th level) is a major minority of the overall game time of the game. Given the discussion here on the boards, the E6 movement, the constant requests for 'low fantasy' and 'low magic' games, it is safe to agree with the asumption the most of gameplay happens bellow 14th level or so.
To that end the devs framed their choices when making changes to the game. That includes magic item creation. Their primary concern was not 20th level since they didnt have a solution for 20th level balance in general in the first place. Much of what was changed does nothing to improve high level play, but does lots for low level play, including the creation rules. XP costs hurt a heck of alot...
I think you've been playing in the Far Realm too long, most forms of logic there don't make sense and this is no different.
I never said anything about being able to close all loopholes 100% but this was a method that did work and was removed.
So for you, the game needs to be broken in order for it to do what you want it to do? I see what type of player you are.
Because....
I can easily limit players from crafting whatever they want by making them find out what they need to spend those precious GP on. The system is abstract, doesn't mean I'll let you create the item without clarifying what that 1000gp you're spending on that +1 sword, is going to be spent on. By limiting certain what the players have access to, you can 1.) drive a game forward and 2.) control what they have.
Oh I want to make a gauntlet of rust.
Rusting grasp spell, check
Leather made from the hide of a rust monster, uh...hmm (we better go find a rust monster, or find someone who has one, and BUY it.)
I'm a DM, I hated the XP tax. Wizard happens to have Craft Weapons and Armor, fighters have GP, but the wizard has to pay the entire XP cost himself??? No it wasn't fair to anyone who had the feats.
Leadership with cohorts, so you give your cohort some craft feats, but he always stays one level below you...where does his XP cost come from?
Besides wish was neutered...I would just not allow the Staff of Wishes to be crafted, oh, it requires the bones of the Tarrasque, to be used.
There's nothing in the rules that says a GM has to let a player craft whatever they want!!
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you've been playing in the Far Realm too long, most forms of logic there don't make sense and this is no different.
I never said anything about being able to close all loopholes 100% but this was a method that did work and was removed.
So for you, the game needs to be broken in order for it to do what you want it to do? I see what type of player you are.
Your opinion against the mass doesn't seem to matter much. XP cost was a burden, it has been removed. Everyone is happy except one or two grognards unable to say no to obvious cheesing ; then you state this is unbalanced according to 20th level build "loopholes"... litterally the worst way to judge game design in Pathfinder, since the game isn't made to be perfectly balanced and in either case nobody cares about level 20 balance as long as it is flavorful and not ridiculously overpowered.
There is a game for you named D&D 4th, it's made to be balanced at every level and it asks for less reflexion or DM fiat.
Also, would you please be so kind as to inform us on what kind of players we (including Paizo designers) are, according to your own point of view ?
It was removed because the inherent limitations the system placed on players made no sense in most situations. No single system can account for all the fringe situations that might arise, such as the wishstaff that you mention. That's simply reality, and why this game is designed to have a GM adjudicating the rules and running things.
The system put in place to counter the fringe situations is GM discretion. You claim you want to get away from this concept, but it is a defining aspect of the game.
Caster crafters are really not going to like what I have to say here, but I'll say it anyway: I would like to have seen Pathfinder return to the old 1st edition Permanency having be applied to a magic item at the end of creation; including losing the 1 point of Con.
I'm not talking about scrolls and potions, permanent magic items, be they weapons, armor, wands, staffs, rods, rings, and wondrous items. It would put the kibash on player character crafting for certain.
Master Arminas
|
|
I think you've been playing in the Far Realm too long, most forms of logic there don't make sense and this is no different.
I never said anything about being able to close all loopholes 100% but this was a method that did work and was removed.
So for you, the game needs to be broken in order for it to do what you want it to do? I see what type of player you are.
Your opinion against the mass doesn't seem to matter much. XP cost was a burden, it has been removed. Everyone is happy except one or two grognards unable to say no to obvious cheesing ; then you state this is unbalanced according to 20th level build "loopholes"... litterally the worst way to judge game design in Pathfinder, since the game isn't made to be perfectly balanced and in either case nobody cares about level 20 balance as long as it is flavorful and not ridiculously overpowered.
There is a game for you named D&D 4th, it's made to be balanced at every level and it asks for less reflexion or DM fiat.
Also, would you be please so kind as to inform us on what kind of players we (including Paizo designers) are, according to your own point of view ?
Where exactly are you getting your data from? What's this mass that you speak of, people that come to these forums? I'm sorry to burst your bubble but the people that come to these forums don't make up the majority I'm afraid. We don't know how many people actually like the XP cost when it came to magic items, you can shout "play test" all you like but there is no evidence that shows the majority of people liked the change. There is also no proof that the peoples feedback would have changed the ruling even if they did like the XP cost.
I don't like 4th edition and I know myself which game works best for and for your information I can swear to you on anything out there that the game was not made with rule exploits in mind. Exploits do not make Pathfinder, or any game for that matter, what it is. There are certain things that do require DM fiat but if you have to revert to Rule 0 in order to balance a game rule then there is a problem that needs to be looked at.
If I were designing a game I sure as hell wouldn't have some of you speaking on my behalf. Exploits should be fixed not told they are what makes the game what it is because that makes the game sound like crap.