|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Doram...
How do you see crafters having less and the rest of the party having double? How is that even possible? SKR's quote says the exact opposite.
Are you making the same argument, that somehow crafters can be FORCED to make stuff for the rest of the party without crafting for themselves?
How do you get to your conclusion? It seems 100% the opposite of what I see actually happen in game.
I made an effort to demonstrate the wealth thing two or three pages ago, and no one proved the math wrong:
"The crafter will be ahead by WBL if the others pay" may be true, but equally true is that "the rest of the party will be ahead unless the GM finds a way to give loot strictly to the crafter." This is hard to do, as you have said. Assume a four person party, everyone gets +1 armor (because everyone had exactly 1000gp to spend). The crafter who made it doesn't ask for a tip. Everyone now has 2000gp in items, except the crafter, who is considered to have 1000gp.
They kill a goblin who has 1000gp. (Maybe he was a goblin crafter who charged his party to make items and they kicked him out. I don't know.) They split it evenly, as parties tend to do. Now, either the crafter is square and everyone else in the party is currently ahead by 1250gp, OR the party is square and the crafter is behind 750gp. To make it even, the crafter could make herself another item, but she doesn't have enough money to do that. If everyone in the party paid 100gp, then the other three party members would be ahead 1150 (or behind 100) and the crafter could make an item putting her ahead 450 (or behind 300, respectively).
In other words: if the crafter makes items for the whole party and the DM gives out loot that can be divided equally, then the crafter will always be behind the rest of the party.
If we assume that the GM wants to keep things balanced, instead of letting the crafter fall further and further behind her "friends" on the power curve, then the DM has no choice but in intervene. The only intervention that doesn't "interfere with how the characters interact" is to stop giving out loot in either gold or items that the other characters can use. Every monster they kill is either broke, or only has items that the crafter can use, until the crafter (in the above example) has another 1000gp in items.
SKR's quote says that the crafter's items will count at cost to create for wealth. The rest of the party's will count double. This means that a crafter who makes a 1k cloak for himself and a 1k cloak for the fighter (who pays the crafting cost) now has effectively half the wealth of the fighter. Fighter's net worth: 2k. Crafter's net worth: 1k. Assuming that both of them are now broke, having spent all their money to make the cloak, then the fighter got a free 1k bump to his net worth.
As I said above: crafters aren't forced to make others' stuff instead of their own. They're forced to make others' stuff instead of other things they could be doing with their time. They're forced to make others' stuff to keep their friends happy (a kind of social extortion).
"We have four days of downtime. I can make you a +1 sword or make myself these four potions I've been wanting. I can't buy them, since I only have money for two of them." Would you buy him the potions (if available) so that he could make the sword? Then I call that fair. No need to charge over, because you paid in kind.
I'm responding to (not making) the argument that if a character has taken a crafting feat and believes that other characters should pay a little more than the cost to create, and the characters don't want to, and the crafter responds by not choosing to craft for them, the crafter doesn't belong in an adventuring party. I say: the crafter is sticking to his moral structure, not screwing the other characters, since the wealth issue would be taken care of by the GM anyway.
Yeah, that keeps coming up. I am a huge fan of SKR. I really am. But that was just bizarre. And it's pure metagaming.
The reason that quote constantly being raised by the profiteers bothers me is because there is nothing in that quote about selling from one PC to another at a profit. All SKR is saying is that crafters can make stuff for themselves and if they do, then they get their stuff valued at cost, while if they provide it to their party members at cost, their party members get it valued at price.
To me there is nothing in that entire quotation that has any relevance whatsoever to this argument.
Literally nothing.
I agree that it doesn't really impact this conversation as that has to do with whole-party economics between the GM and players instead of intra-party economics like we're discussing. However, it is an important note for how GMs should tabulate a characters wealth who has items they crafted themselves for the purposes of determining future treasure rewards.
That said, gimme muh 5%. :P
Now on the road I probably won't charge for my friends. While the group is off doing other things that contribute to the given adventure I probably wont charge for my friends. When the barb and paladin are at the bar drinking and I'm sitting at the inn crafting him a new headband o charisma you bet your lucky tush I'm charging him a 10% fee.
Sorry, I didn't see this post. My apologiez.
The part of what you said that I agree with, I repeated above. And its actually what I've been saying for awhile now- that particular thing just haven't come up in a few pages.
If you are crafting during group time, you are doing gruop things with the group.
If the group is expecting you to craft for them while they are at the tavern sharing a keg, or otherwise jacking around doing their own thing- they are eating into your personal time. I could see someone charting for that. Honestly.
The 'friend" comment. Our group just considers anyone in the gruop at that level of friendship.
If I don't trust you enough to not charge you, I'm also not trusting you enough to take a watch at night, carry the group loot, or anything else involving trust. I do realize that its just my opinion though.
The power ratio you listed. Well, the only issue I have with that is this:
I feel its the DM's job to moderate the relative power ratio of the group, as relates to wealth. Not necessarily the job of the party.
If the paladin is far ahead of everyone else (due to crafting or anything else) then its really the DM's job to step in and fix it. Preferably by increasing everyone else, but also potentially by sliding him back down the scale abit.
Likewise if the crafter remains behind the group he should be brought up- primarily by the DM.
To me, the character saying "The paladin is getting stronger by this, I'm going to weaken him to offset it" is definately not preferable.
Its really an issue with the DM and wealth distribution. (or the lack thereof)
-S
|
|
Yeah, that keeps coming up. I am a huge fan of SKR. I really am. But that was just bizarre. And it's pure metagaming.
Yes. Absolutely.
Of course, all of this is metagaming. Here's how the entirely in-character conversation goes:
"Man, I can't afford that 8000gp sword. Can't you make magic items?"
"Sure. I'll make it for you for 4100."
"Seriously? That saves me 3900gp. Sounds like a deal to me!"
Even the lowest INT Barbarian knows that 50% off is a good deal.
Everything else is meta-gaming, on some level. And, on some level, that's okay. As I said, from a meta-game standpoint in a crafting party the GM has to double the crafter's loot while not giving anyone else anything to make it work.
And crafting is, by definition, meta-gaming. If it weren't, then the crafter could haggle with shopkeepers for a bigger profit, and haggle with party members for a little bonus. The fact that a crafter can never make a profit selling to NPCs is meta-gaming and weird. Going by this rule, though, he also couldn't make a "profit" selling to PCs, unless he charged them over full price.
If the crafter's overall wealth is up 100gp and the +1 sword wielder's wealth is up 1900gp, it is only meta-game logic that says the crafter has made a profit. Also, bad math.
Edit: Added in an end-quote tag.
SKR's quote says that the crafter's items will count at cost to create for wealth. The rest of the party's will count double. This means that a crafter who makes a 1k cloak for himself and a 1k cloak for the fighter (who pays the crafting cost) now has effectively half the wealth of the fighter. Fighter's net worth: 2k. Crafter's net worth: 1k. Assuming that both of them are now broke, having spent all their money to make the cloak, then the fighter got a free 1k bump to his net worth.
Not really. In each case the total value they could get if they liquidated all their assets is 1k gp. That is their net. Their gross totals are 2k but they can only sell for half of the item's price. In that sense, they're still equal. However, SKR's FAQ comes in for the GM to tabulate future wealth. If their WBL at the moment is 1k, then the crafter is sitting pretty but the GM either needs to balance out rewards for the fighter so he doesn't gain much more before his next level.
Really, the net effect of crafting on a crafter is that it stops the drain of buying and selling items. A crafter can take 1k gp and make a 2k gp item and sell it and still get his 1k gp back. A non-crafter, however, takes his 1k gp and buys a 1k gp item but if he sells it now he only has 500 gp and he's screwed. That's why one of the arguments I used in the thread to get that FAQ was that the people who didn't like the ruling are really just angry they can't steal from their players as easily with the ruling. Crafters are the self-sufficient types and rightly so.
|
|
As I understand Wealth by Level, assets count for worth at their market value, not at their resale value. That's what I meant by "free 1k." The non-crafter's worth doubles, on paper, when he gets the item.
So I suppose it's the GM's job to sunder half of the party's items, from time to time, to balance the wealth out.
Now this is my opinion here:In your examples the "quest giver" is talking to the individual- much like might happen in an MMO. (not saying you meant it that way, just go with me for a second). In an MMO i go complete a quest, turn it in, and bam i get gold, exp, and all that.. Yay me. If you are with me and have the quest, you get credit too.
But in a D&D game whats really yhappened is that the DM has used the varying members of the party to lay some adventure hooks.
Wendy comes back to the group and says "Hey guys, the mystic thinks we should go deal with this evil item".
the barbarian comes back and says "yeah, but we also need to deal with this wolf" and so on down the line of PC's.Back in the early 90s when I started with the groups I'm in still, that's how we played D&D. The DM would take Players into a side room and communicate privied Information, and it was up to the player to discuss whatever he/she wanted to with the party. If the Rogue had a side venture than coincided with the Parties overall quest, none were sometimes the wiser. And sometimes this meant PCs got different amounts of XP (of course, back in the day, every class leveled differently anyway).
If the Barbarian was the first to mention the quest, the reasons certain other group members agreed to it, weren't always brought to light.
My last campaign I was in (just ended a month ago) the Ship's Navigator sold Maps of the new continent for more money than the adventures usually brought in (at least after we paid for the crew and food for the next adventure for a shipload). Did he share? Not all the time. Did it bother us? Not overly.
Does this all sound MMO-ish? Class Quests and the like, maybe. MMOs after all are based on Roleplaying games (and not the other way around). The level of "Personafication" of the Quest Givers (Adventure Hooks, or whatever term you want to use to get your Party to do something) is what makes it different.
And quite frankly your approach to gaming...
I started D&D long before the MMO thing came out. way before actually :)
I guess we've just always had a group mentality about it. We want to win. Its nto about 'we all went to Tina the Tailor and got the same quest" but rather "we were all there when the s@&! hit the fan and we're the only ones here who can clean up the room, lets get to it".
Right now we're really the only ones that we know of who are privy to whats goin on. We're far too busy trying to save the world to try and nickel and dime each other over loot.
Your way with the individual quests seems interesting though. As long as its going on with evryone though, no one needs to come back and share the loot yanno? You said my way sounds like am mmo- to me your way does.
5 guys meet up to storm the castle, each having their own quests to go in there from the guys in the village.. No need to compete so they band together go in, clear it, roll the mobs, and come back and talk to their individual guys again.. at once doing their own thing and helping each other at the same time.
Overall it amounts to the same thing though. The group is helping the group. the DM is just giving out a little individual incentive to band together rather than having the Chief gather the 5 man team into his tend and tell them 5 things he needs done in the camp, and telling what he'll pay them to do it.
Just a different set of paths to get at the same goal.
-S
In most of the groups I've played with its rare that everyone is best buddies with everyone. Generally it is more a mercenary group feel. I do feel that you can trust you fellow soldier to keep watch without having to be friends with him. If you cannot trust him not to knife you in your sleep then its time to bring the issue to the table.
I don't see the crafter as trying to weaken the paladin. I see it as the crafter trying to keep up. Every hour a crafter is amplifying another players power is an hour he isn't working on his own power. The same way that the gladiator in the area is building cash and fame. The bard is build his own cash and fame. The paladin is strengthening his connections with the church.
I'm not saying a pc with a craft feat should be as selfishly driven as possible to be the most powerful character. I'm saying that over the life of a campaign that crafter is losing out on social connections, fame, money to amplify another pc's power and that there should be balance.
As I understand Wealth by Level, assets count for worth at their market value, not at their resale value. That's what I meant by "free 1k." The non-crafter's worth doubles, on paper, when he gets the item.
That makes sense, and you're right. They do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every character can do more things with a ring of sustenance. It doesn't change the scale. Although every character is probably not inclined to equip a ring of sustenance.
Best of luck convincing the opposition guys. G'night.
As I understand Wealth by Level, assets count for worth at their market value, not at their resale value. That's what I meant by "free 1k." The non-crafter's worth doubles, on paper, when he gets the item.
So I suppose it's the GM's job to sunder half of the party's items, from time to time, to balance the wealth out.
Doesn't need to sunder anything- he just gives out less wealth geared towards the players who have too much.
Which is really what happens anyway.
Assume level 10 everyone is at approximately WBL
greataxe +4 found.
drooling barbarian gets it by group agreement.
Next nice thing they find is something for the cleric, or wizard.
or rogue.. or whatever.
DM cycles through the group, giving the occasional "big item" to a different party member with small items scattered around to shore up weaknesses and give little bumps here and there.
Crafting would really work no different.
just insert "barbarian has +4 great axe crafted" for "greataxe +4 found"
and continue on.
DM just cycles through the other PC's anywy and keeps going.
-S
Every character can do more things with a ring of sustenance. It doesn't change the scale. Although every character is probably not inclined to equip a ring of sustenance.
Best of luck convincing the opposition guys. G'night.
Hope we don't convince everyone.. how'll we ever get it to 2k posts if we all join hands and agree?
:p
-S
|
Wow, this thread exploded.
I first posted way back on the first or second page and I admit that I have not had the time to read through all 1000+ posts to this point, so if I say something already covered I apologize.
First, in my initial post I brought up the point that the OP stated the group was running Kingmaker. That AP is known to have plenty of time and money in it -- the needed resources to craft items. If he irritates his party members by charging them now, when the conditions are perfect, then during the next AP when the conditions are not perfect, the other crafters will likely do the same to him. Except next time it will likely be a higher charge, since no AP that I know of has better crafting conditions than Kingmaker. When the party resources and time are more limited, the extra charge makes more sense. Therefore, I think it is in his own best interest to not charge the rest of the party now, even if only so that later on he doesn't receive the same treatment.
Second, I brought this issue up to my gaming group to see what everyone else thought. Out of five people, two of us felt that there should be no charge. I have simply never charged any of my party because I'm an "all for one and one for all" player. Perhaps I could have done so and gotten away with it, but it's not me. Only one other player agreed with me. Two other players felt that a 5% to 10% tip was reasonable. They didn't even blink at the notion. The last player felt that if he was the one crafting items, he would certainly want to be paid for the service. However, if he was receiving crafted items from another player, he should only have to pay the Cost price to the other player. Yes, he's the awesome rogue.
Finally, I agree that if a character is crafting for another PC and the crafter suffers an opportunity cost for the time spent crafting, then the item receipient should compensate the crafter for the loss. Perhaps it's the potions that could not be brewed, as in a previous example upthread. The crafter should receive those potions from the PC who gains an item. This is also in the best interest of the party. This way everyone gets what they need, and at the cheapest price possible.
I think the bottom line is you should discuss the issue with the group and do what will make the game run smoothest. Find the solution that everyone can live with so there is no dissention.
Obirandiath, I want to thank you for posting this. My gaming group is playing kingmaker next and we were debating on how to deal with the problem of having too much treasure as a result of crafting. This allowed me to see other POVs on it. - Gauss
|
you avoided the question :)
No doubt, I can be your mirror, but look your past posts, not only to me, they show the same kind of tone.
I replied very clearly for my point of view: I used the same tone you have used in several of your posts before the one in question. So I can be your mirror as I was as rude as you.
BTW, diego, you grossly misrepresented my position. its not that it will never happen, but if your gm will not give your camp 4 hours of quiet time, then your GM is being kind of a dick. anyone without a ring of sustenance can't get a full night's sleep.so the idea for the low level party out in the field. maybe the guy doesn't have a ring and is sitting in the back of a wagon as the party is travelling. this would be distracting as it would cause a concentration check. if the characters camp for 8 hours, the crafter should have time to craft things and sleep on the road if he doesn't have guard duty. unless the party is attacked every night, he should get at least 4 hours of crafting each night. Assuming a crafter, he probably does 1 craft skill as he is low level, maybe two, and has spent 1/10th of his wealth getting the 2 portable toolsets (or less depending on the GM's interpretation)
but yeah, if your GM doesn't want you to craft, he should just be honest and that solves all problems
LOL, you again you discount bot the distracting and dangerous situations as not real. It is not relevant if you are attacked every night or every 6 weeks, what is relevant is that you can be attacked so you should be wary and distracted from your work.
Your reply sum up to: "I am playing a video game, the world exist only when I am moving around, as soon as I left a frame it is freeze frame for everything in that location". A stile of playing that I loath. The world is a moving place, in my world you can't camp in the wilderness and say "the GM is a dick if something happen, we should be totally fine". There are wandering monster tables and rules exactly for that reason. You are lighting a fire in the middle of a plain in a clear night? Intelligent creatures from miles around your position will notice it. Some will care and come to investigate, some will not. The guy with survival will routinely take the prosecutions to hide your campfire? Good, the chances of an encounter drop. Beside the fire there is a guy hammering a new sword +3? some of the creatures that have come to check the fire can be even more interested.
That not meant "automatically hostile". It can be a druid that has come to see if there is the risk of a wildfire spreading, a faerie dragon that want to play a prank, a lone traveller hoping for help or simply a chat or the local troll tribe wanting to make a snack f you and your horses,
Re-reading your post I see you are in the camp Being distracted = concentration check. I doubt we will never get to agree even remotely on what is the problem see.
If the DM s literally have an encounter interrupting every single night then he is being abit of a tool.
But the possibility is *always* there- or should be. Thats why no one is ever alone. Even in the cities, folks travel in pairs. Whether crafter cindy is crafting on her own time or for the group, someone is with them all the time just in case. Only in very rare circumstances does someone in our group go off truly alone.
Not because the DM is a jerk- but because the world is alive. We're pissing in some pretty deep water bowls, and whatever lives in them isn't guaranteed to come between 8am and 5pm. We're on watch 24/7.
-S
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The reason that quote constantly being raised by the profiteers
Maybe the other side should start to routinely call you the "Slave labour" group. It is "fun" (in reality it isn't) how some people on your camp call for civilly and them feel free of using insulting terms.
|
|
If the DM s literally have an encounter interrupting every single night then he is being abit of a tool.
But the possibility is *always* there- or should be. Thats why no one is ever alone. Even in the cities, folks travel in pairs. Whether crafter cindy is crafting on her own time or for the group, someone is with them all the time just in case. Only in very rare circumstances does someone in our group go off truly alone.
Not because the DM is a jerk- but because the world is alive. We're pissing in some pretty deep water bowls, and whatever lives in them isn't guaranteed to come between 8am and 5pm. We're on watch 24/7.-S
Exactly. My point is that the crafter on the road know he is in a potentially dangerous situation and that he should divert some of his attention to what is happening around him. so he is not in a controlled environment and suffer the half speed production malus.
If he so engrossed in is work that he is not distracted he should suffer large negative modifiers to is perception and to his initiative as he is unprepared to cope with problems. Even with a sentinel out there is always the chance that the sentinel will miss his perception check.I have a lot of post to catch up, but I don't see a reply to the other problem about working on the road. working outside is not the same thin as using an appositely preparative work station. Saying the you work at the same speed in both locations is stretching the rules.
If the DM s literally have an encounter interrupting every single night then he is being abit of a tool.
But the possibility is *always* there- or should be. Thats why no one is ever alone. Even in the cities, folks travel in pairs. Whether crafter cindy is crafting on her own time or for the group, someone is with them all the time just in case. Only in very rare circumstances does someone in our group go off truly alone.
Not because the DM is a jerk- but because the world is alive. We're pissing in some pretty deep water bowls, and whatever lives in them isn't guaranteed to come between 8am and 5pm. We're on watch 24/7.-S
Exactly. My point is that the crafter on the road know he is in a potentially dangerous situation and that he should divert some of his attention to what is happening around him. so he is not in a controlled environment and suffer the half speed production malus.
If he so engrossed in is work that he is not distracted he should suffer large negative modifiers to is perception and to his initiative as he is unprepared to cope with problems. Even with a sentinel out there is always the chance that the sentinel will miss his perception check.I have a lot of post to catch up, but I don't see a reply to the other problem about working on the road. working outside is not the same thin as using an appositely preparative work station. Saying the you work at the same speed in both locations is stretching the rules.
ah.. Well count me as staying out of that debate. I have no idea what the rules require for it. I largely leave that to the crafter and the DM to determine.
-S
|
|
Crafting may be an out of combat feat but it grants significant bonuses in combat. It is easily equal to weapon focus or other feats due to the increased effective gp total a player can weild with it. - Gauss
It's a wash in combat. The crafting takes place out of combat.It's not a wash in combat. The crafter has taken a non-combat feat. They are therefore WEAKER in combat. They make up for that by crafting things OUT OF COMBAT. Their OUT OF COMBAT activities are what balance their IN COMBAT weakness.
That's the wash.
Thats sort of the point, no?
The feat isn't worthless in combat. It just doesn't have "+2 to attack rolls" in the feat description.
No one is saying the feat is worthless. Just that taking it doesn't allow you to take more than your fair share of the loot.-S
Yes, but Adamantine Dragon opinion seem to be that if you take the Crafting feat you are somewhat short charging the party if you don't make stuff for all of them as you are [i]less effective in combat[/i+ for missing a combat feat.
Honestly, to me the idea of playing with someone that think as the right to dictate to me what I should do with my feats (or my skills, or my character build) is anathema.|
|
just so everyone knows what we're talking about.
the line in there that says
Any place suitable for preparing spells is suitable for making items.
you're arguing that this
This work is generally done in a controlled environment, where distractions are at a minimum, such as a laboratory or shrine. Work that is performed in a distracting or dangerous environment nets only half the amount of progress (just as with the adventuring caster).
means that a caster can't craft in the field. by that same logic, a character cannot prepare spells in the field because it is a dangerous and distracting environment
Preparation Environment...
To prepare any spell, a wizard must have enough peace, quiet, and comfort to allow for proper concentration. The wizard's surroundings need not be luxurious, but they must be free from distractions. Exposure to inclement weather prevents the necessary concentration, as
1) If you want to link something, link the PRD not a third party document.
2) You are purposely misconstruing my statements or simply you fail at reading them? You can memorize your spells on the field, you can craft on the field, what you can't do is to work at full speed. There is a specific rule about crafting on the field:
This work is generally done in a controlled environment, where distractions are at a minimum, such as a laboratory or shrine. Work that is performed in a distracting or dangerous environment nets only half the amount of progress (just as with the adventuring caster).
The other rule:
Any place suitable for preparing spells is suitable for making items.
don't supersede that, they are complementary rules.
You can craft or study on the field, but as it is not a safe and controlled environment you work at half speed.
Ok, maybe its near 3am and i'm just tired.. but I think I figured out a large part of the problem here.
We think we have two sides.
pro crafter taking extra coin
con crafter taking extra coin
But that isn't actually true.
We have.
1) All else being equal, the loot the group gets is paying the crafter for their crafting already.
2) By RAW, the WBL doesn't work if the crafter doesn't find some way to get the wealth, and the other PC's are really the only way for them to get it.
3) Screw you all, I want my 10% because I can, and if you don't like it, jump on a spear.
1 and 2 are actually fairly close together in general thoughts. Both are trying to do the right thing with minimum fuss. The problem is raw, and who has the burden of balancing WBL.
now in my opinion- its the DM. The DM should be in charge of balancing it rather than the PC's trying to balance it themselves.
the party should get some say in it (for example, if everyone pools their wealth intentionally to get Bob the Item of Uber Bobness or something, then that's their business.. but assuming they aren't doing such oddities- I believe the DM should adjust WBL by how (and when) they distribute loot.
I Hope i can say that, the "no crafting fee" group would be willing to admit that if your DM is unwilling (or lacks the balls) to do it, and some folks are getting a seriously disproportionate share of the wealth, that it would be OK for the PC's try sit down, as a group, and try to fix it themselves. Afterall, no one wants to be the guy 50% below wealth when everyone else is 30% above. or the guys at 10% below while one guy is 40% above, or whatever the math works out to be for the group.
I think (and hope) both sides would agree that the DM *should* be handling this through loot- but as an extreme fall back position, the group can do it themselves.
Not limited to just the Crafters, but the entire group.
I hope i'm not taking too big a leap on behalf of "my side" by saying that.
Now the greedy dudes in group 3.. well. they just need to grow up. If sheer greed is your sole motivation such that you don't care if everyone else suffers as long as you get what you want- you have a right to play that way.
But not with me. I think I can safely say that not very many people want to have a good ole sit down for a few hours gaming with Ye Olde Selfish Dude. But if you find a group that does- have fun.
tl;dr:
I think both of the reasonable sides are alot more in line with each other- its just a matter of who is in charge of enforcing WBL: the group, or the DM. (and who really cares what the greedy guys think? there's no reasoning with them anyway :p)
-S
|
|
If they are dumb and the condition are right, Yes. (They are dumb because it reduce their survival chances, and they still have to cope with the environment and equipment limitations).
in your campaign it never rain when you are moving around? never a day of bad weather? As already explained that alone will mess with most crafting attempts in the field.
To me pretending to work full thrust for 4 hours on the road, increasing the danger for the whole party (as you increase the chance of encounters and effectively remove a guy from the encounters) seem much more "stealing" from the party than asking a compensation for the time spent during downtime crafting for some other guy.
I agree that generally crafting on the road without some decent shelter might not be optimal, though secure shelter and a bag of holding or two can take care of that. The portable laboratory by itself would not be good enough in my games.
I have a hard time combining the charging of fellow PC's above the 50% you will get from EVERYONE else, it is a metagame rule to keep the game from being kicked off the rail but making up for it by charging your always present customer base seems a way to bypass that as some sort of loophole.
If you can't charge npc's more you shouldn't charge the pc's anymore than that either. Personally I think the whole crafting/magic items part of the game needs a review to make it flow better. Meanwhile I just houserule the heck out of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, I haven't really read a lot of the posts. Got tired of reading the same exact BS over and over again.... Got to about page 10 or so before tiring of it.
Honestly, if the party Wizard who takes a lot of the Crafting feats, want's to charge 10% to party members for time expended, then by all means he is free to do so. In fact, I would say that the party should be encouraged to do so. Allow me to explain why....
That extra gold can very easily go to expanding his spell book. These are all spells that will inevitably benefit the party, weather through more combat spells, or utility spells. Even more spells to craft a wider range of magic items. Not only that, but that is all gold that could be going to wands, scrolls, and potions. Even the Wizard saving the extra gold to buy a magic item for himself whilst he crafts magic items for others is a good idea, because it keeps the Wizard viable in this games ever scaling requirement of +s. Oh, and if it's another class, like the cleric, that extra gold can go to CLW wands, for example.
Seriously though. It all really boils down to players perception on the game. If they view it as a game to 'win', then any form of a player gaining an advantage over them, no matter how small, are going to find the above idea abhorrent. Those who are more into it for the joy of the game, do more role playing and thus do things from an IC perspective, or just generally don't care, those are the ones who'll enjoy the above idea.
In either case, it's something that should be discussed before taking said feats.
Edit: YMMV, really.
Also, I'd like to add that if anything, a crafter can craft items on credit, either for gold, favors, or other things to occur later. Or they can even waive the fee if situation calls for it.
What would really put a problem on things is a notion of interest, which is what my old playgroup used to do when loaning gold to people for magic items... THAT is a jerk move.
I think the only real solution is for Everyone in the Group to take 1 Crafting Feat and wear the Slave Collar of Sustenance* so that everyone has to help upgrade everyone else's stuff equally.
Problem solved with 800 posts till 2,000 to go ;-)
*Personally I only use the ring when I have less than 2 other rings. Its not one I tend to want to keep. And with a Week to "Attune" its not like its something you can swap in and out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alright, I've been thinking alot about the crafter WBL issue and I think we've been doing it wrong. I could be wrong though- math isn't exactly my schtick.
We've been saying that basically the crafter gets double WBL by crafting, and thats what lets him take a lil off the top in order to keep up. I think this is actually the flaw.
Before SKR's ruling there was much debate about the crafters.
Without SKR's ruling, crafting was kinda wonky.
Crafter turns 4k into an 8k item and in return for his feat, gets 4k less loot overall from the group. Kind of a bummer.
Now though, the crafter turns 4k into.. 4k. and his wbl is credited 4k.
So when loot is distributed by WBL, he's gonna get another 4k.
Now when he crafts for his buddy Roddy Ranger, his buddy slides him 4k, and he slides RR back *8k*. RR isn't getting that 4k benefit- hes getting 8k tacked onto his WBL.
So if the DM is enforcing WBL, the crafter will get more loot than the ranger because the crafter will be behind the ranger. (crafter having 4k and the ranger having 8k).
Now if yuor group is largely ignoring WBL, then this is irrelevant. By ignoring RAW you are also ignoring one of the benefits of crafting. Just like if the DM is tailoring items to what the PC's want and need, another benefit of crafting is largely diminished.
Now the effect of a 10% tax depends on how your DM is adjusting WBL.
If you increase the cost 10% of cost and give that to the crafter and subtract it from the ranger- if the DM is strictly going by WBL then its actually a wash. One guy on the forum said that every 2-3 levels he WBL audits the characters and shores up the poor and knocks down the rich. Under this model it doesn't matter what the crafter charges. He gets no benefit from taking from the ranger and the ranger doesnt' care cuz the DM is going to fix it anyway. under that model the crafter could charge *anytihng* as long as RR actually had the cash, it would be irrelevant. (not saying I agree with that kind fo WBL micromanagement, but that is the effect it would have)
If the DM is monitoring WBL as a group rather than any individual person though, or if he's just doing a sort of round robin with the gear drops so that everyone gets something nice occasionally, then the 10% tax becomes more pronounced. The crafter is making his own things, getting loot from the DM and also taking loot from the other people.
Other people are presumably getting nice items from the DM, getting some things crafted, but are losing their free wealth to the crafter.
The crafter is slowly getting richer and richer at their expense. I would disagree with that in this model.
The crafter isn't making up for something he's losing, he's just getting richer and ahead of the group. The DM Can step in occasionally and "rebalance it" but then we just end up with the example above- where the 10% is irrelevant because the DM is going to take it away anyway and give it back.
"huh how odd Cindy Crafter ended up with 4000 more gold than everyone else. *divides it back to the group so everyone is even*.
(of course if he just gives everyone else 4k to balance it out, then giving the crafter 10% actually turns into a net gain for everyone. CC gets 4k extra and so does everyone else, yielding a financially better off group as a whole. lol)
However the Dm handles it though- the crafter isn't getting double WBL. the "double wbl" thought is just a way for the crafter to not get screwed in loot when the DM enforces WBL. Without it, the crafter would get charged just as though he bought things from the NPC at the end of the day when the DM went to balance WBL. And that would be unfair.
-S
If they are dumb and the condition are right, Yes. (They are dumb because it reduce their survival chances, and they still have to cope with the environment and equipment limitations).
in your campaign it never rain when you are moving around? never a day of bad weather? As already explained that alone will mess with most crafting attempts in the field.
To me pretending to work full thrust for 4 hours on the road, increasing the danger for the whole party (as you increase the chance of encounters and effectively remove a guy from the encounters) seem much more "stealing" from the party than asking a compensation for the time spent during downtime crafting for some other guy.
This also is group dependent. Asking the group to carry your watch so you can do some crafting and such is a group decision. For our group, its actually what we do. We have 5 characters who don't craft, 1 who crafts alot and 1 (me) who rarely crafts. the 5-6 not crafting keep watch over the 1 who does since he's doing work for the group.
And even when he's making his own items, he's still working for the group, so we watch his back anyway.
-S
...Ok, maybe its near 3am and i'm just tired.. but I think I figured out a large part of the problem here.
We think we have two sides.
pro crafter taking extra coin
con crafter taking extra coinBut that isn't actually true.
We have.
1) All else being equal, the loot the group gets is paying the crafter for their crafting already.
2) By RAW, the WBL doesn't work if the crafter doesn't find some way to get the wealth, and the other PC's are really the only way for them to get it.3) Screw you all, I want my 10% because I can, and if you don't like it, jump on a spear.
1 and 2 are actually fairly close together in general thoughts. Both are trying to do the right thing with minimum fuss. The problem is raw, and who has the burden of balancing WBL.
now in my opinion- its the DM. The DM should be in charge of balancing it rather than the PC's trying to balance it themselves.
the party should get some say in it (for example, if everyone pools their wealth intentionally to get Bob the Item of Uber Bobness or something, then that's their business.. but assuming they aren't doing such oddities- I believe the DM should adjust WBL by how (and when) they distribute loot.
I Hope i can say that, the "no crafting fee" group would be willing to admit that if your DM is unwilling (or lacks the balls) to do it, and some folks are getting a seriously disproportionate share of the wealth, that it would be OK for the PC's try sit down, as a group, and try to fix it themselves. Afterall, no one wants to be the guy 50% below wealth when everyone else is 30% above. or the guys at 10% below while one guy is 40% above, or whatever the math works out to be for the group.
I think (and hope) both sides would agree that the DM *should* be handling this through loot- but as an extreme fall back position, the group can do it themselves.
Not limited to just the Crafters, but the entire group.I hope i'm not taking too big a leap on behalf of "my side" by saying that.
Now the greedy dudes in
Unfortunately the best way is to literally metagame it. the DM says "hey guys, Guy X is way behind, so the minotaur warrior has a rod of metamagic: quicken, one of bouncing spell and one of maximize. That'll even him up with the rest of your WBL."
Kinda bites in character, but if he is going to enforce WBL thats really how it can go down.
Alternatively, introduce someone who rewards them for their hard work and gives the PC a disproportionate amount in reward. Still though, OOC he should tell the group whats going on.
WBL in general ends up being a very OOC thing anyway. Even the DM handling it by rotating good items through the group is very artificial- its just an unfortunate and necessary thing going on if you are going to adhere to the WBL system throughout a campaign. At some point you just have to break the 4th wall and metagame the hell out of it if you are going to use it at all.
-S
|
|
or the GM could just talk to the crafter...As I understand Wealth by Level, assets count for worth at their market value, not at their resale value. That's what I meant by "free 1k." The non-crafter's worth doubles, on paper, when he gets the item.
So I suppose it's the GM's job to sunder half of the party's items, from time to time, to balance the wealth out.
And ask them to charge 10% or craft less for the party. I like that idea. :-)
|
|
I've been thinking about the "quid pro quo" argument, and why it seems like a false equivalency to me. So I thought I'd play this out. I'm going to use Selgard's last false equivalency post as an example.
Let's assume that the crafter made a single item for everyone in the party, a +1 cloak of resistance. (Something relatively cheap that everyone can use.) He asks for a 1% tip. Everyone gives him 505gp, he spends four days crafting and hands over four cloaks. He made 20gp on the deal. Everyone else saved 495gp, thanks to his feat. Everybody goes and buys potions and heads out for their adventure.
I mean, in reality, anything is fair agame- as long as the others can ask the same thing of you to do their party share of things.
"hey, yuo are bleeding profusely.. This heal? yeah.. Night with your wife. she is -smoking- i've been wanting to tap that for awhile. Want to be healed? It'll just cost you a night. no? aww. pity that".
Or he asks for 50gp. Or whatever. Crafter's logical response: "I'll pass. Also, you can make your own magic items next time. Meanwhile, I'll spend the time I would make spend making you items to brew some curing potions and won't need healing from you anymore. Also, the next time you need a 'Protection from Evil,' it'll cost you. Or, you could heal me and I'll owe you a protection spell, later." Problem solved. Either way, the crafter doesn't need the healer, if he's spending his crafting time replacing him with potions, instead of making items for him for free.
or Ranger comes back and tells the group he found where big bad's lair is- he'll tell you if you agree to do his share of the camp chores. for a month.
"Excellent work. Here's 3 silver. What? A trained hiring gets 3sp/day, and what you just did could have been done by any tracker. It's not really equivalent to the 495 gold I saved you, is it?" False equivalency. Find something the ranger can do that's worth almost 500 gold and we'll call it even.
Or the rogue says he'll open chests for 20% of the contents, his choice of the 20%. He'll open any door as long as he gets to pick what loot he gets off whatever's on the other side.
"Don't bother. I prepared Knock. Next time, instead of making items for you, I'll make a bunch of Knock scrolls and you can stay home. Also, you owe me 100gp for that Cat's Grace." False equivalency. This one is even more incredible, because the Rogue has just cost himself 100gp for a spell that he really needs, because he didn't want to pay 5gp to the crafter. Puts me in mind of a saying about noses and faces.
Wizard'll be happy to go to the library and research how to kill the demon you've been chasing, as long as you agree to do murder for him when he requests it, no questions asked.
"Here's your 3sp/day. Maybe you should learn to craft items so that you can pay Experts to do your research for you?"
The overall theme is still the same:
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. If the crafter gets to charge extra, or somethign special, or whatever, then everyone else does too.
Absolutely, as long as it is of equal value. None of these examples are of equal value, are they?
I've said it before, I'll say it again: your character shouldn't get to tell the crafter's character how he can play his character. If he thinks charging is the right way to do (and we've pretty thoroughly demonstrated that it doesn't unbalance the party, monetarily), he provides a service that is, in terms of gold, because the magic item pricing is necessarily out of whack with the price of everything else in the game, far and away more valuable than any other out of combat service. In-combat services are a wash, because just about every crafter will be casting spells, which are expensive to buy. But out of combat, the crafter's time is just worth more.
Maybe that means the feat is broken. Maybe, like Harrison Bergeron, crafter should be saddled with some punishment for being out of whack. Maybe that punishment should be having half the effective wealth that the rest of the party has.
Or, maybe, you should let other people play their characters in ways that make sense to them without telling them what they can and can not do. If a crafter says, "pay me a little extra or buy from Ye Olde Magic Shoppe," you have lost nothing, mechanically, because your wealth doesn't change. All you have done is let the crafter be the crafter he wants to play.
What you keep saying is, "no, other players don't get to play the character as they see it. They have to play it the way I see it, or someone's leaving the game." That reads as social extortion, petulant and closed-minded. The crafter isn't telling you how to play you character. The only person doing that is the one who says, "do it for free or you're out."
I've been thinking about the "quid pro quo" argument, and why it seems like a false equivalency to me. So I thought I'd play this out. I'm going to use Selgard's last false equivalency post as an example.
Let's assume that the crafter made a single item for everyone in the party, a +1 cloak of resistance. (Something relatively cheap that everyone can use.) He asks for a 1% tip. Everyone gives him 505gp, he spends four days crafting and hands over four cloaks. He made 20gp on the deal. Everyone else saved 495gp, thanks to his feat. Everybody goes and buys potions and heads out for their adventure.
I mean, in reality, anything is fair agame- as long as the others can ask the same thing of you to do their party share of things.
"hey, yuo are bleeding profusely.. This heal? yeah.. Night with your wife. she is -smoking- i've been wanting to tap that for awhile. Want to be healed? It'll just cost you a night. no? aww. pity that".
Or he asks for 50gp. Or whatever. Crafter's logical response: "I'll pass. Also, you can make your own magic items next time. Meanwhile, I'll spend the time I would make spend making you items to brew some curing potions and won't need healing from you anymore. Also, the next time you need a 'Protection from Evil,' it'll cost you. Or, you could heal me and I'll owe you a protection spell, later." Problem solved. Either way, the crafter doesn't need the healer, if he's spending his crafting time replacing him with potions, instead of making items for him for free.
or Ranger comes back and tells the group he found where big bad's lair is- he'll tell you if you agree to do his share of the camp chores. for a month."Excellent work. Here's 3 silver. What? A trained hiring gets 3sp/day, and what you just did could have been done by any tracker. It's not really equivalent to the 495 gold I saved you, is it?" False equivalency. Find something the ranger can do that's worth almost 500 gold and we'll call it even....
No one person gets to dictate terms to the group, either.
You say "I can play my character however i want to"I say "Make someone to conform to the group, or go home"
4 guys are playing LG people, a paladin cleric fighter and rogue.
They invite a 5th guy to the group. He comes in and makes a CE serial killer.
Right to play who you want how you want? Or someone who isn't a team player.
Answer: CE guy is asked to reroll and choose a concept and character who fits the group.
4 guys are playing LE people. You have a cleric, a fighter, a rogue, and a wizard. They are part of a LE organization who while evil, is also lawful and stringent. Not unlike an evil military force.
They invite a new guy to the group.
He brings in a LG Paladin.
Right to play what you want how you want? or someone who isn't a team player?
Answer: LG paladin is asked to reroll and choose a concept and character who fits the group.
Guy who thinks 10% fee is fair comes into a group who says it isn't, and expects him to either charge nothing or do something else.
He says they are stifling his creativity and that he's allowed to play his charcter however he wants to.
Or
Guy who thinks 10% is anti-party joins an established group. the group has a crafter who charges 10% and the group thinks thats awesome to get the 40% discount. New guy pitches a hissy fit and only pays the 10% after )(@#$'ing and whining about it, constantly demeaning and insulting the crafter and complaining about it. Afterall- he can play his character how he wants rigtht?
No. If yuo are going to join a group you have to be part of the group. If they are a no evil group then yuo aren't evil either. If they are an evil group you don't get to roll in a paladin.
Likewise, if the group is fine with 10% thats the rule. You don't get to countermand it. You conform or you go home.
If the group Isn't ok with the 10%, you don't get to charge it.
If someone is making a character to refute what the group has asked be done, then that player shouldn't expect for his character to be in the group. Its just unrealistic. This is a group game. You are playing it in a group, and you should conform to whatever the group says it acceptable- or find a group that better conforms to you.
The whole bit about "if you can charge for your stuff we'll charge for ours" is really just an attempt to get the person to see reason and act like a group member. They aren't likely to actually charge him.
They'll just leave him in town next time.
No matter *which* side of the argument you are on here- you don't have the right to dictate terms to the group. Its a group decision not something 1 character- whichever side you are on- gets to dictate.
"consult your group" not "do what I want and screw them anyway". Not if your character expects to hang out in the group.
-S
I've of the opinion of many others here:
If I can get magic items for half price, (20k over 40k) and the crafter wants to charge me 22k vs 40k.
I'll let him "Steal" from me ALL campaign long!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Yes but at the same time the group doesn't get to dictate to you. If you want to play a LG Pally in a LE party sure you can do that you make your pally either oblivious or slowly convert him to and Anti pally or you can make the quest important enough that the LE choose to work with him instead of try to kill him or if that Pally wants to play the super holier than thou type he gets locked in jail and the rest of the party shrugs and he rerolls after his character does what he wants. (Not to mention lawful evil is barely evil assuming you're in a mostly just society and if the society is fundamentally broken the pally is too busy trying to overthrow it to be in a party with anyone.)
LE is barely evil? if someone is playing it barely evil I suppose so, but I envision LE like the Church of Bane in the old FR setting.
Bane wanted his church to rule the world- he just had a very orderly priesthood doing it. They'd kill burn maim blackmail or do whatever it took to get it done. They just did it in an orderly fashion.
Just because they use order to accomplish their goals doesn't mean they aren't being dispicably and diabolically evil in the process.
But, alignment issue aside-
The group really does get to dictate some things to the members.
If they say "We think summoners are broken and don't allow them" you don't get to play a summoner.
If they say "we are playing an evil campaign, no paladin" yuo don't get to bring in a paladin.
The party has the right to maintain party cohesion, or the party falls apart. Either you are on board or not.
Whether thats the group saying 10% is fine and you disagree, or the party says 10% is absurd and you disagree- you go with the party or the party goes without you.
Sure there is discussion involved. They could change your mind- you could change theirs. But there is discussion involved- not you dictating how you insist things are going to go.
We're moving from the abstract "does a crafter have a right to charge 10%" into "can the party enforce within itself how it thinks things should go".
Whether or not you believe the crafter has a right to charge 10%- that doesn't mean you get to bork the party and do whatever you want.
When you move from the abstract to sitting at the table- everyone has the obligation and responsibility to follow the rules of the party. Whatever they are.
Any given person is part of that discussion, but its the group who decides not any individual.
I'm not talking as a "I'm in the group and yuo won't charge 10%" guy.
i'm talking "if the group says 10% is fine, then everyone goes with it- even the odd guy (me) who thinks its robbery"
Just like "if the group says no charge, everyone goes along with it even the guy who thinks he deserves 10%".
Its not about me (the guy who hates it) or you (the guy who thinks he deserves it). It becomes about what the group says is appropriate or isn't appropriate for that campaign.
And it could very easily change. in campaign A the group decides 10% is criminal and in the next they say it'd be ok- based on the group and whats going on in it.
It doesn't change how you (or me) thinks things Should go but if you aren't willing to go with the group, you need to find a group that agrees with you.
-S
edited: to make a sentence make sense
If 4 guys think the party should be run X way and one guy thinks it should be run Y way, who wins?
Does Y guy dictate how the 4 guys play? or does the one guy leave, or change what he wants to go with the 4?
Sure in an ideal world whatever the issue is- is something they can negotiate or come to some sort of agreement on.
Sometimes the best answer is for someone to leave, though.
If 4 guys really want to do evil and one guy wants to play the paladin, its just incompatible. they either don't get what they want or he doesn't get what he wants. Something is going to have to give. It may just be time for the 4 to have a 4 man evil campaign and bring in guy 5 for the next one.
"Guys i really want to play a paladin please play LE not evil please"
is like them asking the paladin to play a paladin and ignore his code.
The paladin can't be int he LE party while they are doing LE things and stay a paladin. Sure if his stated intent is to fall and be an anti paladin after a level or so he's really fitting in with the group. He should say so from the outside and avoid the whole drama.
But if 4 guys wanna be LE Banites and 1 guy wants to be apaladin there really isn't alot of give in either way. Someone isn't going to get what they want.
I do think if 4 out of 5 think something is over powered or doesn't fit though that they can ban it. "We really don't like the summoner (or gun slinger or ninja or think the monk sucks, or whatever)". Sure there can be some give and take (no its ok guys I'm not taking the Synthesist, honest) but it may just be that they think its OP and don't want it in the gruop. Whether you are starting at level 1 or coming in at level 10 to an established group. If the one guy really said "only the DM can say that" then the 4 guys would turn to the DM and ask him to ban it for being OP. Same result. Its banned.
Or you can tell the group to screw off, make one anyway, an wonder why you are the 5th wheel that everyone hates in the group.
"I get to do what i want" vs "I need to fit in with the group".
The group wins.
The same is true of the issue of crafters getting paid extra. Right or wrong or indifferent- its really a decision for the group not any one person.
"hey guys, I'm playing a cleric of X and he'd really be charging you all for this service.. how do you think that should be handled" is an excellent conversation to have with the group, that can lead to alot of interesting opportunities for the party.
"hey guys I think I deserve 10% off each item I craft for taking the feat".
They agree. They disagree. whichever way it goes, is pretty much how it goes.
You can either decide to go with it, or to go against them, or to do something else entirely.
If you go against what they say though, don't expect much cooperation from them. Afterall- you aren't cooperating with them. And its certainly not unreasonable to expect for them to just leave that person in the tavern and recruit someone else. Someone who will go with the group rather than conflict with what it thinks is right, fair, and just. (whichever way that tends to be. the guy who insists 10% is robbery and constantly makes an ass of himself is just as wrong as the guy who insists on taking 10% when the group says no).
Its a group game. You play it with others. No one should micromanage each other, for sure, but there are some decisions that impact the group. And the group has a say in them.
They can't (and definately should not evne try to) force you to take any given feat. They can however dictate how those feats are used within the confines of the group.
They have the right to tell the crafter he can't charge them 10%, and to enforce it, just like they have the right to tell the wizard he can't drop an empowerd miximized fireball centered on the group camp. And they can enforce that too.
The enemy should be folks the DM is controlling, not the PC's. You are making a PC to get along in the group and to thwart the evil machinations of the DM- not to thwart the goals and ideals of the party you are in.
-S
Wow, I skip out on the thread for 250 posts and the same dude is making the same straw-man accusations about anyone who doesn't agree with his specific POV. Way to go, chief. You keep fighting the good fight.
Not entirely sure what you are referring to. Neither side is making a strawman argument. We're just discussing how we think things should work and be run.
-S
One guy on the forum said that every 2-3 levels he WBL audits the characters and shores up the poor and knocks down the rich.
Just to clarify, I don't knock down the rich. In 7 levels of the current campaign Im running Ive had to make an adjustement exactly once. I gave everyone an item during an RP encounter (rather than as loot) but each item had a different GP value. It brought them closer together although they do not have exactly the same value. Every 2-3 levels is about every 6weeks for us and takes only a few minutes for my players to give me a copy of their equipment. - Gauss
Edit: P.S. In our group we decide house rules and major things like how to deal with this problem as a group. I do not rule by DM fiat. I see my role as DM as a facilitor rather than as 'GOD' although we do make the obligatory jokes that I am GOD (either the deity or Game Operations Director, take your pick).