im still of the opinion that metagaming is a bad thing. that your character wouldnt care about a 10% charge, only that its fgetting a 40% discount on what ever item hes getting.
to me its this simple. i dont allow metagaming at my tables as a gm, or as a a player. and i would ignore said metagamer if he objected to my charging him, if he chose to be stubborn and pay full price, good for him.
Except that its a false premise to say that its metagaming for him to know the actual value (and therefore, what half of that value) is.
If you assume that both sides are being 100% honest and no trickery involved:
Your PC's are in the business of rolling evil dudes for cash. (or good guys for cash, if an evil group, I suppose)
I can't speak for you or your group, but rolling Big Bads (and the little bads that go with them) for cash is our predominate past time. Its what we do. Our game largely revolves around finding the Big Bad to squish him. (and the incidentals that it entails). And to take his loot. And then to sell it.
It might start with goblins, evolve to orcs then some evil (demi)humans and then to some giants and dragons and demons and devils or whatever but at the core we're a bunch of folks who slay evil, sell its loot, and then gear up either with that loot or with the cash we get from it.
Saying that its metagaming for me to know that sword cost 4k and not 4200 and that you are taking 200 from me when its only worth 2k to craft is just dishonest.
Its like saying someone who has been in the graphic design business doesn't know the worth of his work, or that someone who flips houses for a living doesn't know the cost/benefit ratio of what he's doing.
The PC's are in the business of acquiring loot, selling loot, and buying loot. Saying its metagaming for them not know the relative values of that loot is just not right at all.
-S
I stopped readng after page 4 I believe, when the OP seemed decided.
Now, over a thousand posts later, I think that this thread answers itself.
It has more posts than all other threads of the first page (and probably several others) combined!
And it's not like it's the first time this came up and everyone got something new to discuss.
If you ask for payment, you're very likely to get a loooong discussion (in character or out of character) and can't play during that time.
I believe that all the gold in the campaign can't make up for fun lost in such a campaign.
I stopped readng after page 4 I believe, when the OP seemed decided.
Now, over a thousand posts later, I think that this thread answers itself.
It has more posts than all other threads of the first page (and probably several others) combined!
Shakes his head.
Then you missed that one of the objectives of this thread is to also see if we can get it to go over 2000 posts.
Thank you for aiding in that goal.
:)
I stopped readng after page 4 I believe, when the OP seemed decided.
Now, over a thousand posts later, I think that this thread answers itself.
It has more posts than all other threads of the first page (and probably several others) combined!Shakes his head.
Then you missed that one of the objectives of this thread is to also see if we can get it to go over 2000 posts.
Thank you for aiding in that goal.
:)
Ditto!
-S
It is all about the WBL religion and WINNING THE GAME.I think ^this^ is the meat of it, as is the meat of any class envy position wherever it comes from, be it Marxism or what have you. And the truth, as always, is that communism kills the golden goose.
If you want me to make zero profit from my crafting, then I'll just by different feats, and nobody gets the benefit.
1) The second you consider a guideline a hard rule that you shouldn't budged in any way it become a religion whose tenets can't be discussed but only followed. Some guy has pointed it out in this thread, I have pointed it out in other threads: if you follow WBL as a hard rule that should be enforced the guys that buy and use tons of expendable can easily exploit the system, as he is constantly burning resources that the GM will replenish increasing the loot. The guy that use permanent items is instead don't get anything as he has more stuff stuff.
The cicada is rewarded, the ant is punished.
Never seen a valid reply to that.2) "He has more stuff than me, he is winning the game. Unfair, unjust, unacceptable." it is the same logic of "all characters should be perfectly balanced". I care more for fun than perfect balance.
Apparently some people will not find the game fun unless there is a perfect balance.This. Crafters take crafting feats specifically so they can have more loot. If you want to have more loot, take your own crafting feats. If you want to piggyback off of others crafting feats, don't whine and complain when he sells you something 40% under cost, and keeps 10% for himself! He just did you a FAVOR that earned you FOUR TIMES what he earned, and all his downtime was sucked up by that favor while you got to run around and do other things.
Under my proposed model (repeatedly detailed pages ago, but it hasn't come up in awhile)
is thus:If the group wants CC (cindy crafter) to make items for them, then she isn't in fact doing it on her time. She is doing it on theirs.
While adventuring:
they take her turn at watch, they do her share of hte camp duties (making camp, breaking camp, all that other crap). Someone is also specifically watching -her- arse to make sure she can craft in peace without getting interrupted. (by that sleazy rogue, or by an uppity orc)
While in town- they are setting aside group time for her to craft as well.
The group comes into town, finds an inn, lays out what needs to be done in town and then divies up who does what. Now assuming everyone doesn't go around as a group, do everything, then leave (which is entirely possible) but instead is staying a couple of days, it might work out like this:
two guys (the good looking, diplomacy blokes) go to the Mayor (king, whatever) to find out what they can abouut their next mission. They also take the haul from their last outing with them and sell it on the way back to the inn. (or on the way there, or whaever)
Two folks (probably a smartie and a thug) hit up the library to do some research. One guy researches, the thug makes sure no one ganks him while he's doing so.
The crafter stays back at the inn *during this specific time* also with a guard, to make some things for the group.
A couple (or few, whatever it takes) hours later the group comes back. Everyone has been working hard, everyone cleans up and hits the tavern. They share a meal, a pony keg, and relax.
No one is being made into slave labor, everyone is contributing to the group. No one is getting paid extra.
Now there is a contrast to this- that has been suggested repeatedly. And its really what you suggest in your post. And its this:
The group comes back to town. Everyone splits up and does what needs doing for the group. Except CC. CC is in the inn working her tail off. When the group comes back, they make sure CC is still busily working while they go eat and have a pony keg. They stumble up to the room a few hours later, drunk off their arse. if CC is lucky someone rememberd to bring her some dirty water and 3 day old butt of bread to nibble on.
"Don't worry CC, we got you that ring. You'll be fine. We'll uncuff you in the morning to use the privy".
Its abit sarcastic, and I understand that, but the moral is: if your group really is treating you like a slave then find a new freaking group. But they *ought* not be. They should be treating you like what you are: a full blooded member of the group. Entitled to your fair share of everything. The loot, the down time, and your share of the work when it comes to working. If they really are treating you as a slave you need to talk to them about it seriously, then sure charge them out the arse.
I wouldn't charge them though. I'd just leave. What a bunch of unsufferable jerks!
-S
For many people the terms "Communist" and "Marxist" and "Occupy Greyhawk" are not insults. I presumed since you abide by an extension of these philosophies in your game, that those terms would not be insulting to you. If you are insulted by them, perhaps you have a different term you'd like me to use? I'll happily use it.
1) Probably closer to 30%, because the party isn't hocking everything they find, and you lose value when you hock it.
2) The effects that 30% has on CR are peanuts compared to the effects of the Leadership Feat, and you don't even have to spend all your downtime to get Leadership's benefits.
3) It's also peanuts compared to what a properly built arcane summoner can do with Planar Binding, what a Druid can do with Liveoak/Awaken, what a necromancer can do with undead, etc. All these things impact the encounter CR more than loot does.
Do you prohibit those things as well in your games? Do you assign value to mounts, cohorts, animal companions, familiars, demon summons, bound undead, etc in your games, and reduce those PC's loot accordingly? Lord I hope not.
It's your job as GM to manage encounter CR. If your players are okay with you managing that by a highly complicated Biannual Game Audit instead of...
I am not a communist nor do I care about communism one way or the other. However, you have called me names and it is clear YOUR intent is to insult when you use them. Calling someone a Nazi is not appropriate in any case and while you have not called me one directly you have referred to people in my position (ie me) as one in other posts. Rather than attacking the person or group of persons you should be stating your arguments.
1) Not to inflame you farther but the hocking part of it should not bring you below WBL either by the book or in my game. Example in your game as I understand it: your equal cut of the treasure was 2500 but in order to make use of it you have to liquidate it thus netting you 1250. This is a fast way for you to fall behind. Example in my game: I figure out in advance what the players are most likely to sell and only count that equipment for half value. I am usually correct. When I am not I adjust a future treasure accordingly.
2) Agreed that leadership is broken. Our group shies away from it on an individual level without any house rules about it needing to be made.
3) Planar Binding is like wish..there are always loopholes. Liveoak/Awaken have limitations in environment and they are not automatically your ally (friendly yes, ally no). Necromancer with undead is always nasty, but that is an evil campaign and those are far and few.
Bringing up other potentially broken sections of the game does not negate this section of the game.
The 'audit' is not complicated. It is extremely simple. I ask for copies of equipment sheets, I enter said data (on my time not game time) into spreadsheet and viola! I know how much equipment they have. Doesnt take me long at all (since most of that equipment is just an update of previous equipment). What I do with that information varies depending on how far they are off of WBL and why. I use the WBL as a guideline not a hard and fast rule like you seem to believe I do.
Even back in 2nd edition such 'audits' occured so that the DM can keep track of what equipment people have and tailor treasure piles accordingly. Note: at that point I was not yet a DM, this was many other DMs I played with that did this.
I recognize this is not everyone's style, great. If we all had the same style this would be a very boring game. That does not make my style any less workable than yours. And now, I need to go prep for gaming, I have some PCs to try to kill (that was a joke).
- Gauss
A question for the "the good of the group first" guys. How you manage things like the scrolls and wand charges that the spellcasters or UMD guys use up on the group behalf? And the other expendables (potions, missile ammunitions and so on)?If the effect of the crafting feats should be equally shared, I don't see why the cost shouldn't be equally shared. A thing like a wand of CLW, Fireball or Black tentacles is used for the group good, so why it count in the user WBL and in his share of the loot?
Wouldn't be logic to pool all the expendables and distribute then to the people that can use them free of charge?
Our group splits the shares of treasure with a 'consumable' pool of treasure. While we are still playing with the ratios (4.5 or 5 shares in a 4 PC group) it works for the amount of comsumables required. Additionally, this way if someone dies it comes out of the party treasure share and not their own. - Gauss
1) Not to inflame you farther but the hocking part of it should not bring you below WBL either by the book or in my game. Example in your game as I understand it: your equal cut of the treasure was 2500 but in order to make use of it you have to liquidate it thus netting you 1250. This is a fast way for you to fall behind. Example in my game: I figure out in advance what the players are most likely to sell and only count that equipment for half value. I am usually correct. When I am not I adjust a future treasure accordingly.
And this is why SKR's foolish ideas are so wrong, in this case. For example, a crafter receives a set of +2 banded mail as his share of the treasure (it was all items and no one uses banded mail anyway). The armor, his share, is worth 4,000 gp on the market. The party returns to town, he sells the armor for 2,000 gp and uses that 2,000 gp to craft himself a ring of counterspells (market price 4,000 gp, crafting cost 2,000 gp). It takes him two days of down-time to craft it.
His wealth should still be figured by price (not cost), putting him at the same Wealth by Level as the rest of the party (maybe even slightly ahead, if they sell their stuff instead of having the items upgraded).
But, if we use what SKR intends, THEN the crafter lags 2,000 gp behind his fellow party members and the DM should include a 'crafter-only' item or items, consumable or otherwise over the course of the next few adventures to bring the party once again on an even keel.
WBL is a guideline, and it reflects ONLY the wealth level that characters should be at when they reach the level in question. After that, they are gaining more items and gold and other stuff, increasing their WBL until they hit their next level.
For example, an 8th level character has 33,000 gp on average. As he adventures, he gains more wealth until by 9th level, he should have 46,000 gp of coins, items, and equipment on hand.
It is the job of the DM to ensure that neither too much, nor too little wealth is provided to the party as a whole. That entire system can easily be thrown out of whack by crafters figuring their own wealth for items crafted[/i] at cost, rather than price.
Take Brew Potion, or Scribe Scroll, or Craft Wand. Those consumables are always useful and handy to have. A crafter with one, two, or all three of those feats can have twice the recommended percentage of his funds devoted to consumables. Easily. How many cure light wound potions at 25 gp a pop can a crafting cleric haul around by 6th or 7th level? Counting as HIS own wealth, even though he feeds them to party members after each combat? Or delay poisons for 150 gp each?
It makes far more sense for the crafter to consider the market price of the items he crafts instead of cost.
Just my opinion.
Master Arminas
1) Not to inflame you farther but the hocking part of it should not bring you below WBL either by the book or in my game. Example in your game as I understand it: your equal cut of the treasure was 2500 but in order to make use of it you have to liquidate it thus netting you 1250. This is a fast way for you to fall behind. Example in my game: I figure out in advance what the players are most likely to sell and only count that equipment for half value. I am usually correct. When I am not I adjust a future treasure accordingly.And this is why SKR's foolish ideas are so wrong, in this case. For example, a crafter receives a set of +2 banded mail as his share of the treasure (it was all items and no one uses banded mail anyway). The armor, his share, is worth 4,000 gp on the market. The party returns to town, he sells the armor for 2,000 gp and uses that 2,000 gp to craft himself a ring of counterspells (market price 4,000 gp, crafting cost 2,000 gp). It takes him two days of down-time to craft it.
His wealth should still be figured by price (not cost), putting him at the same Wealth by Level as the rest of the party (maybe even slightly ahead, if they sell their stuff instead of having the items upgraded).
But, if we use what SKR intends, THEN the crafter lags 2,000 gp behind his fellow party members and the DM should include a 'crafter-only' item or items, consumable or otherwise over the course of the next few adventures to bring the party once again on an even keel.
WBL is a guideline, and it reflects ONLY the wealth level that characters should be at when they reach the level in question. After that, they are gaining more items and gold and other stuff, increasing their WBL until they hit their next level.
For example, an 8th level character has 33,000 gp on average. As he adventures, he gains more wealth until by 9th level, he should have 46,000 gp of coins, items, and equipment on hand.
It is the job of the DM to ensure that neither too much, nor too...
Frankly, before I even knew of SKR's ruling I used the rules pretty much that way. Crafted items count at cost (not price) for the crafter. Crafted items made for others counts as price (not cost). For me the question is how that is implemented is the problem, not the rule in and of itself. Again, this seems to be unpopular but, there you have it. - Gauss
As to your "e-mail with the DM and hide it from the group" business.
No- I'd say you need to talk with your Dm about the issue instead of hiding from the group.
All you (the character- not You) is doing is hiding from the issue.
The figther taking a feat and never ever using it is just as wrong as the crafter taking it and never ever using it for the group. The issue in your case is the DM- not the rest of the players.You are saying "the group disagrees with me so screw them I'm going to just craft for myself and to hell with the group". I mean, when you boil it down, thats really what you are saying. i say you are better off not taking the crafting feat than dictating the terms to your group. If your group doesn't think a fee is acceptable for the group then it isn't acceptable.
I mean it'll go like this:
you find out your group doesn't like 10%.
You take the feats anyway and secretly craft when no on can see. (not sure how, but lets go with it anyway)
The group starts noticing you coming up with alot of things you shouldn't be able to afford that they havent' been seen dropping from the critters they been rolling.Now you have a really pissed off group. You are even *more* likely now to get left in the tavern than you were by just being up front about it all.
"crap hes been lying to us this whole time, and being a sneaky b**** about it too." "yeah and how do we even know he really crafted all this stuff? We never saw him do it. He could have just been stealin stuff off the side this entire time"You've taken a metagame issue used to solve a metagame problem and have turned it into a very real IC, ingame, RP problem for the group. Now you are a liar, and not a team player, and.. well.. IC the group would have to metagame to keep you a member of the party.
It still sounds like you are still fixated on the possible greed aspect. Not all reasons for crafting fees are greed related. And just because someone doesn't tell the group that they can craft, it isn't necessarily due to greed. Please understand that other reasons exist besides greed.
It also sounds like the players in the group know what the character sheets of the other players look like, what is on them. It isn't always so in every group.
That cleric crafter of mine, when the group was formed (Legacy of Fire), no one was sure what to with a Tiefling, they thought he was a fighter at first, but then became very confused when he cast several types of spells (ranger/druid, cleric, mage/sorcerer). They often shuddered when the healed them because he called on either his Master or Mistress (he worships a concept, gods of purity, so he has at least seven holy symbols on him - and he has a very bad temper), they worried about getting infernal healing.
In the story line, there is a year's break. Plenty of time for crafting, etc.. withou any of the others knowing. Nor would there be a big surprise when he pulls out magic that they haven't seen before, as they weren't with him when he acquired it.
The GM knows all the details about the PC, but the other players don't. The other players trust me and the GM not to build illegal or broken characters.
Part of the fun of playing that character is the mystery surrounding him. That would get lost if every detail had to be announced to the rest of the players.
As for the other characters noticing the hidden crafter having more, it sounds like the players using metagame information to determine that. How would any of the other PCs realize that the hidden crafter had augmented their ring of protection +3 to +5 (or cloak +3 to +5, etc..), without knowing that last game, an attack hitting AC 22 hit, but this week one hitting AC 23 missed?
Again, if your system is working for your group, more power to you. Not all groups work the same way.
Some of us find it insulting to be told that our play style/way is "thieving" from other PCs. Other words could have been used, ones that are less inflamatory, but your side seems to be having difficulty in letting that word go, or even believing that other methodes are acceptable.
So, i have a crafting wizard and we're playing kingmaker, we just hitted lvl 5 and started building the kingdom.
I'm a LN mage follower of Abadar, the other party member are a paladin a LG oracle, a NG inquisitor and a N druid.
I decided to add a 10% fee on the creation cost when crafting item for the party (this mean that a belt of +2 str will cost them 2200 instead of 2000, which is still a lot better than 4000); this caused an unexpected reaction on the other players (not pg, players).
They now pretty much consider me to be a jerk, just suggesting this we're arrived to the point of them preferring to buy the items at full price and they said me this is not right since the don't make me pay for cure, tanking ecc ecc.
This was totally unexpected by this group since they are always very mature, am i missing something and being "that guy" without knowing? Is this some kind of delicate argument in the average group?
They sound like the jerks. I don't charge my allies for item creation feats, but anything is better than full price. For a 10% discount, they should be thanking you if they aren't item crafters themselves (and they probably should be). Beggars cannot be choosers.
Additionally, your crafting items is not equivalent to tanking, healing, blasting, or whatever. It's your time. The argument here is not akin to a working peer asking for pay to do his job in the workplace, it is akin to a working peer asking for a tiny compensation for hooking them up with a sweet deal on his own time. To illustrate further, my father is an awesome mechanic. He does not ask his co-workers to pay him if they need help with a problem while they are on the job. However, when his co-workers/associates need something on their vehicles fixed, he will work on it during his off-time, and charge them little more than the cost for the parts.
They're ecstatic because they get $400 + parts jobs done for $50 + parts, or occasionally trade in favors. My father has been known to do a job for someone in need for only the cost in parts, but the real jerkass would be any guy or gal who expected my father to take time out of his day, off the job, to give them a free ride like it was his obligation.
Just no.
I've also participated in some online persistent worlds on OpenRPG. In one of the longer running ones, PCs were allotted time that could be used for item creation and the like as the game progressed. There were PCs who made items for other PCs, and even kept little spreadsheets or notes as to what items were ordered by who, what their markup would be, and how much time was being dedicated to the crafting. There was virtually always a markup. More often than not, it would be better to describe as a discount. One artificer gave a 25% discount on the items he created (incidentally, he also had a 25% discount to create them). He got many, many orders from PCs, and no one called him a jerk or greedy.
Some advice on how to deal with this situation will be most appreciated! :)
Tell your friends to grow up and stop being greedy fools. Tell them to stop being spiteful while you're at it. Going out of their way to buy magic items at full price because they hate that they are sharing the wealth at huge discounts by buying from their friends giving them a deal, merely because they don't want you to have, is a prime example of not only a fool but a pathetic person.
Except that its a false premise to say that its metagaming for him to know the actual value (and therefore, what half of that value) is.
If the guy has the appropriate knowledge skills, and makes an appropriate roll, he can indeed know the cost to craft an item. It is absolutely fundamentally metagaming for him to know that I have Hedge Magician on my character sheet.
My problem is that its metagaming to solve a metagame problem.
In Character:
"I am Frank Fighter, Hear me roar. Point me at the bad guys and I will cleave them in twain."
"I am Bobby Barbarian. Hear me ROAR! Point me at.. nearly anyting, and I'll attack it like a rabid dog.. roar!"
"I am Roddy Rogue. Point me at a locked box, trapped door, or someone being distractedd by those two dumb thugs, and let me at 'em!"
"I am Cindy Crafter. I'll blow thigns up inc ombat and charge you extra to make you magical items."
"collective ......"
I love how you completely red herring'd Cindy. Lets try the truth for a change.
Cindy: "My name is Cindy Crafter, and I can save you 40% over buying something at the store."
Group: "FORTY PERCENT IS NOT ENOUGH I DEMAND FIFTY PERCENT."
Cindy: "...."
next session:
Cindy's Player: "I have dumped Cindy and rolled up a Barbarian. I demand that you guys craft things for me at 50% off."
Now nobody gets their 50% off items. See how aggressively overbearing Communism kills the golden goose?
|
It is the job of the DM to ensure that neither too much, nor too little wealth is provided to the party as a whole.
Good post.
It's off topic (although we are aiming fo 2,000 posts) but, given you mentioned about a thousand posts ago that you didn't allow a character's successful business to increase his wealth, how would you have reacted if the business had failed and ended up costing him money, thus putting him below the wealth by level guidelines?
I'm interested because I have an idea for a cleric of Cayden Cailean who loves betting on the horses.
When he wins, he spends the winnings (but not the stake) paying for the constuction of statues of his god (all of which bear a striking resemblance to the character) and hiring bards to wander the taverns extoling the virtues of beer and the rewards you get in the afterlife for buying a drink for clerics of the god of beer.
When he loses, he shrugs it off with "the god will provide".
Also, he doesn't believe in selling those unwanted magic items that might be of use to less experienced adventurers. Instead he gifts them to novice adventuring groups which are in tune with his deity's ethos (i.e. CG or similar), asking them to "repay him if they meet with success in their adventures".
As the GM, would you work to ensure such a character didn't fall below the wealth by level guidelines, or would you allow the character (and ultimately the group) to suffer for him effectively wasting his money?
It is the job of the DM to ensure that neither too much, nor too little wealth is provided to the party as a whole.Good post.
It's off topic (although we are aiming fo 2,000 posts) but, given you mentioned about a thousand posts ago that you didn't allow a character's successful business to increase his wealth, how would you have reacted if the business had failed and ended up costing him money, thus putting him below the wealth by level guidelines?
I'm interested because I have an idea for a cleric of Cayden Cailean who loves betting on the horses.
When he wins, he spends the winnings (but not the stake) paying for the constuction of statues of his god (all of which bear a striking resemblance to the character) and hiring bards to wander the taverns extoling the virtues of beer and the rewards you get in the afterlife for buying a drink for clerics of the god of beer.
When he loses, he shrugs it off with "the god will provide".
Also, he doesn't believe in selling those unwanted magic items that might be of use to less experienced adventurers. Instead he gifts them to novice adventuring groups which are in tune with his deity's ethos (i.e. CG or similar), asking them to "repay him if they meet with success in their adventures".
As the GM, would you work to ensure such a character didn't fall below the wealth by level guidelines, or would you allow the character (and ultimately the group) to suffer for him effectively wasting his money?
If the character wants to start up a business, it doesn't matter if it succeeds or fails: I tally that wealth outside of the character's normal WBL. He can't spend it on magic items and gear, he can't make loans to the other party members, he pays taxes and guild-fees out of his 'business accounts'. If he winds up losing his shirt, he loses his shirt--but keeps his normal WBL items and equipment. Of course, the loan-shark crime-lord he is in hock to might just come looking for the money owed and interest, but that's a plot hook for the whole party to deal with!
Master Arminas
(Emphasis mine.) I consider this to be very bad advice, and would never adopt it with my friends as I would expect them to react very badly to such an approach.
I question the quality of your relationship with your friends. If you can't be strait with them, then they're not really your friends. Real friends can be honest with each other, and being able to be mature about it and say "Ok, douche move, dude" and then move on, is part of being a friend.
========================================================
they said me this is not right since the don't make me pay for cure, tanking ecc ecc.
After talking it over with my D&D buddy on the phone just now, discussing it with him, we determined that this is an excessively poor argument. They are getting paid for this. Do they get a cut of the loot at the end of an adventure? Yes? Then they should quit complaining. If they're not taking any shares of treasure and are STILL assisting, then maybe they'd have some sort of argument, but you are all already compensated for basic adventuring efforts.
|
|
(Emphasis mine.) I consider this to be very bad advice, and would never adopt it with my friends as I would expect them to react very badly to such an approach.I question the quality of your relationship with your friends. If you can't be strait with them, then they're not really your friends. Real friends can be honest with each other, and being able to be mature about it and say "Ok, douche move, dude" and then move on, is part of being a friend.
Fair enough, we don't have the same friends.
However, there are ways to be honest without calling your friend a "spiteful, greedy fool". Have you ever said something similar to your friends, or had them speak to you that way? I haven't, and I doubt I ever would over a mere game.
(Emphasis mine.) I consider this to be very bad advice, and would never adopt it with my friends as I would expect them to react very badly to such an approach.I question the quality of your relationship with your friends. If you can't be strait with them, then they're not really your friends. Real friends can be honest with each other, and being able to be mature about it and say "Ok, douche move, dude" and then move on, is part of being a friend.Fair enough, we don't have the same friends.
However, there are ways to be honest without calling your friend a "spiteful, greedy fool". Have you ever said something similar to your friends, or had them speak to you that way? I haven't, and I doubt I ever would over a mere game.
There are many ways to say the same thing. Some people could tell you that you look nice and stir a fire under you, while others could tell you that your breath smells like bantha poop and make you smile while doing it.
I personally would have no problem telling my friends "I'm sacrificing my crafting time to give you an amazing deal, and not only are you being spiteful, but also foolish, because you are paying full cost for spite, which is flushing money down the drain, as opposed to spreading it in-group; and it makes you not only look spiteful, and foolish, but also greedy because you got angry at a 90% discount instead of 100%. What gives dude?"
I'm pretty sure that my friends have been just as strait with me before. Maybe more so. I do have a few blunt friends sometimes, and I appreciate them for their honesty; though I admittedly try to keep such conflicts to a minimum.
For example, you say that your friends and you would not speak to one another so boldly (or perhaps rudely) over a mere game. To me, that line has already been crossed the moment they through a tantrum. Actions speak louder than words, and throwing a tantrum out of greed, then being spiteful, and acting in that way? That's loud, clear, and more abrasive "you greedy fool" any day of the week.
========================================================================
On a side note, the 3.x DMG actually discusses how to solve problems like grownups, for all these gamers who lack the reasoning ability of my friends when we were young teenagers. For example, it discusses how to split treasure in a fair way, which even includes buying equipment from your allies. You find 3000 gp + a magic sword? You determine the total price, divide that, and then dump treasure on each other until you're more or less even. The guy who grabs the magic sword might not even be get a share of the 3000 gp, and may even have to give the difference in value to the rest of his allies out of his own funds not related to the adventure itself.
"Let's see, okay, we can sell the sword for 5000 gp, so you guys take my share of the 3000 gp, and I'll give you guys the difference out of my bag of holding, and if I don't have enough, then I owe you guys some. Everyone cool? Sweet deal, new 10,000 gp sword for me!"
Heck, it even offered to let PCs bid on items if there was an item that multiple people wanted. "Ok, so barbarian want's the +1 sword, and so does fighter. Let's start the bidding at 1/2 market price. Do I hear 5000 gp?"
Fighter - "How about a trade? I have a ring of protection +2 which I found, but I also have a continuous protection from evil item, and I'm specialized in swords. Want the ring instead?"
Barbarian - "Hm, sure, that works."
No where does it ever suggest that you should throw tantrums, act spiteful, shun your friends, or otherwise. To do so while you're both mutually benefiting makes you both an ass and a fool. "Dur, I don't want to compensate my friend even a little, so instead of getting a 90% discount off the difference between market cost and creation, I'm going to tell my friend he's a jerk and then get 0% discount on the item. Yeah, that'll show him!"
I'm in the camp that before the game starts, when you're discussing what character you want to play, I'd clear it with everyone that you'll be "gimping" your character to get access to craft feats for the benefit of the party.
That'll mean I would expect the other players to consider occationally helping with crafting a necessary item or giving you an item drop that would help your character - this I would appreciate from either side of the equation.
As for a "fee", I don't think its necessary, but "favors" as I just mentioned would be appreciated.
And this is why SKR's foolish ideas are so wrong, in this case.Arrogant much? SKR helped design the game we all play and gives you a reason to post on the forums. You're...... nobody.
You people really need to stop crying. Crafting makes money. Just like in real life. You buy food at the grocery store to cook because it's cheaper than dining out all the time. If dining out was as cheap as cooking, no one would cook. Now just replace cooking with crafting and the point is still true.
You're debating a role playing aspect of the game vs a meta aspect. This doesn't work. Role playing, the OP's mage of Abadar(The god of commerce), would never do something for free. Free isn't how commerce works. Players can get mad all they want because they know the cost is half the market value for crafting but that's a meta aspect that their characters do not know and it has no place at a table. Meta when you're not playing. Be happy that the crafter was able to save you money over market value AND you were able to get the exact item you needed through him instead of searching treasure hordes in hopes of getting it.
WBL is a guide line and will fluctuate all the time. According to the many posts on how the GM must balance the WBL means that regardless of your outlook, crafter charges or he doesn't, everyone except the crafter will maintain WBL while the crafter is able to pull that much more ahead(Still fits the official FAQ). There is no disparity where the non-crafters are now way behind their WBL.
Stop treating dynamic games as absolute equations. There can be no ruling on this because it is a role playing vs meta aspect. It doesn't affect other rules subsets, and will thus be up to the GM and players to set rules at their tables on how they want crafting to be governed.
@OP talk to your group to see what everyone's expectations are and explain how your character, a mage of Abadar, would be expected to charge for any transaction as that IS your god's...
Nobody? I am thinking reasoning human being with my own thoughts on the subject. And if I think SKR or anyone else makes a bad call, I'll say it. If that makes me arrogant, then so be it. Guilty as charged.
As I have said throughout this thread repeatedly, if it works for you, GOOD. I don't let player character craft in my game. I don't use Golarion. I ignore MANY of SKRs clarifications. I don't allow gunslingers. Or magi. Or inquisitors. Or oracles. Or samurai. Or ninjas. Because they don't fit my game.
I play Dungeons and Dragons, not Accountants and Attorneys, so I think crafting and all this is something that simply bogs downs the game. And I don't use it.
I was expressing my own views on how it should work. Take it or leave it. Now you can get on your high horse and call me nobody all day long. That doesn't keep me from expressing myself, nor does it hurt my feelings. But if makes you feel better go right ahead.
Master Arminas
Nobody? I am thinking reasoning human being with my own thoughts on the subject. And if I think SKR or anyone else makes a bad call, I'll say it. If that makes me arrogant, then so be it. Guilty as charged.
While I disagree with almost everything else in your post, +1 to this. There's nothing that makes anyone, designer or not, more than someone else. Nothing about being a game designer (whether he's good or bad at it) sets him above anyone else. If anything, it makes his material more subject to scrutiny, because he's not just homebrewer #3264, he's supposed to be providing quality material. He's getting paid to do what many people who do a better job with mechanics would love to get paid for (I'm sure you can find a few dozen posting free stuff for people on Giant in the Playground).
Who do I think you are!?
Master Arminas
Personally, I wouldn't mind paying our caster a slight amount extra to make items. He could just hoard his time and make items like scrolls and wands and wondrous items for only himself, but instead, our party wizard is willing to devote quite a bit of his time to make items for the rest of the party. If we had to go to an NPC wizard, we'd be paying full price (less any discount we could get for diplomacy, which wouldn't be nearly what the wizard would charge with a 10% surcharge).
I guess I'm just lucky that the wizard in our party doesn't charge that extra amount, but still... if he did, I'd pay it without a fuss. I guess that's just me though.
Sure, I do my part in combat and with roleplay and using skills for the party without charging, but I think crafting is something else above and beyond.
Just my 2 cents... YMMV
There, I did my part to push towards 2k.
|
im still of the opinion that metagaming is a bad thing. that your character wouldnt care about a 10% charge, only that its fgetting a 40% discount on what ever item hes getting.
to me its this simple. i dont allow metagaming at my tables as a gm, or as a a player. and i would ignore said metagamer if he objected to my charging him, if he chose to be stubborn and pay full price, good for him.
Except that its a false premise to say that its metagaming for him to know the actual value (and therefore, what half of that value) is.
If you assume that both sides are being 100% honest and no trickery involved:
Your PC's are in the business of rolling evil dudes for cash. (or good guys for cash, if an evil group, I suppose)
I can't speak for you or your group, but rolling Big Bads (and the little bads that go with them) for cash is our predominate past time. Its what we do. Our game largely revolves around finding the Big Bad to squish him. (and the incidentals that it entails). And to take his loot. And then to sell it.It might start with goblins, evolve to orcs then some evil (demi)humans and then to some giants and dragons and demons and devils or whatever but at the core we're a bunch of folks who slay evil, sell its loot, and then gear up either with that loot or with the cash we get from it.
Saying that its metagaming for me to know that sword cost 4k and not 4200 and that you are taking 200 from me when its only worth 2k to craft is just dishonest.
Its like saying someone who has been in the graphic design business doesn't know the worth of his work, or that someone who flips houses for a living doesn't know the cost/benefit ratio of what he's doing.
The PC's are in the business of acquiring loot, selling loot, and buying loot. Saying its metagaming for them not know the relative values of that loot is just not right at all.
-S
So it boil down to: "Every character has 20 skill in appraise from level 1 for free"?
Maybe you know that you can sell a used +1 sword for 1,000 gp (actually 1,157.5 as you should factor the masterwork and weapon cost) and buy a new one for 2,315 as, at level 5 and above you probably have brought/sold one or two of those (or not, my current group, at level 5, has never sold a magical weapon),but why you should know what it cost to make one unless you are capable to make one?So you get an offer of a new weapon for 1,415 gp, more than what you would get for selling a used one but less than the cost of a new one but you "know" that it is not the "right price"? And it is not metagaming? You know that price only because you are consulting the CRB.
And the price of all the other stuff that you have never brought/sold? what experience has the character in selling lanterns of revealing? Cloak of protections (you start selling them only after all the group has one and at that point no one would be crafting +1 cloaks)?
The stuff that get crafted is usually at the same level of the best loot you will find, not items that you have been selling fr the last 5 levels.
As side note, a guy pretending to pay that +1 longsword 1,157.5 gp would be actually stealing from the crafter as the production cost is 1,315 gp (masterwok+base weapon cost). So unless you are dipping in the crafter pockets you will never pay an armor or a weapon the same sum that you will get for selling it at a merchant.
BTW: in my games if you are willing to take the time (it can be months) or you have the right contacts you can e more than 50% for your sold items. I started playing in AD&D 1st ed. and don't care for WBL. I ballpark my player rewards and adjust encounters when it is needed.
|
|
Under my proposed model (repeatedly detailed pages ago, but it hasn't come up in awhile)
is thus:If the group wants CC (cindy crafter) to make items for them, then she isn't in fact doing it on her time. She is doing it on theirs.
While adventuring:
they take her turn at watch, they do her share of hte camp duties (making camp, breaking camp, all that other crap). Someone is also specifically watching -her- arse to make sure she can craft in peace without getting interrupted. (by that sleazy rogue, or by an uppity orc)While in town- they are setting aside group time for her to craft as well.
The group comes into town, finds an inn, lays out what needs to be done in town and then divies up who does what. Now assuming everyone doesn't go around as a group, do everything, then leave (which is entirely possible) but instead is staying a couple of days, it might work out like this:
two guys (the good looking, diplomacy blokes) go to the Mayor (king, whatever) to find out what they can abouut their next mission. They also take the haul from their last outing with them and sell it on the way back to the inn. (or on the way there, or whaever)
Two folks (probably a smartie and a thug) hit up the library to do some research. One guy researches, the thug makes sure no one ganks him while he's doing so.
The crafter stays back at the inn *during this specific time* also with a guard, to make some things for the group.A couple (or few, whatever it takes) hours later the group comes back. Everyone has been working hard, everyone cleans up and hits the tavern. They share a meal, a pony keg, and relax.
No one is being made into slave labor, everyone is contributing to the group. No one is getting paid extra.
Now there is a contrast to this- that has been suggested repeatedly. And its really what you suggest in your post. And its this:
The group comes back to town. Everyone splits up and does what needs doing for the group. Except CC. CC is in the inn working her tail off. When the group comes back, they make sure CC is still busily working while they go eat and have a pony keg. They stumble up to the room a few hours later, drunk off their arse. if CC is lucky someone rememberd to bring her some dirty water and 3 day old butt of bread to nibble on.
"Don't worry CC, we got you that ring. You'll be fine. We'll uncuff you in the morning to use the privy".Its abit sarcastic, and I understand that, but the moral is: if your group really is treating you like a slave then find a new freaking group. But they *ought* not be. They should be treating you like what you are: a full blooded member of the group. Entitled to your fair share of everything. The loot, the down time, and your share of the work when it comes to working. If they really are treating you as a slave you need to talk to them about it seriously, then sure charge them out the arse.
I wouldn't charge them though. I'd just leave. What a bunch of unsufferable jerks!-S
You proposed method is so full of assumption that it will work only for your group and groups like it.
It boil down to:- a character feat are a communal property
- a character time is a communal property
- the group as never real downtime as they are always doing some group related thing.
You are perfectly right, I would find another group and especially another GM with which to play.
|
|
I am not a communist nor do I care about communism one way or the other. However, you have called me names and it is clear YOUR intent is to insult when you use them. Calling someone a Nazi is not appropriate in any case and while you have not called me one directly you have referred to people in my position (ie me) as one in other posts. Rather than attacking the person or group of persons you should be stating your arguments.
It is different from calling people "profiteers" "thieves" and so on?
Or from accusing people to be party breakers?Police your side first and then you can star protesting for how other people call your side.
Our group splits the shares of treasure with a 'consumable' pool of treasure. While we are still playing with the ratios (4.5 or 5 shares in a 4 PC group) it works for the amount of comsumables required. Additionally, this way if someone dies it comes out of the party treasure share and not their own. - Gauss
A question for the "the good of the group first" guys. How you manage things like the scrolls and wand charges that the spellcasters or UMD guys use up on the group behalf? And the other expendables (potions, missile ammunitions and so on)?If the effect of the crafting feats should be equally shared, I don't see why the cost shouldn't be equally shared. A thing like a wand of CLW, Fireball or Black tentacles is used for the group good, so why it count in the user WBL and in his share of the loot?
Wouldn't be logic to pool all the expendables and distribute then to the people that can use them free of charge?
More or less what my groups do, but how far do you go in this?
As you are advocating some kind of perfect WBL balance, how are treated the wands or staffs (they are permanent but with the charge limit they are used for party good, not for the good for the single player) and all other items that are consumed for the party.You pool all the consumables (arrows, scrolls, potions, wands, one shot items and so on) or only some of then? You buy them as a group from party funds when someone think that a teleport scroll or a CLW wand will be a good investments as a safety measure?
What items are brought by the group and what are brought by the individual? And why one item is treated in a way and another in a different way?
I am not a communist nor do I care about communism one way or the other. However, you have called me names and it is clear YOUR intent is to insult when you use them. Calling someone a Nazi is not appropriate in any case and while you have not called me one directly you have referred to people in my position (ie me) as one in other posts. Rather than attacking the person or group of persons you should be stating your arguments.It is different from calling people "profiteers" "thieves" and so on?
Or from accusing people to be party breakers?Police your side first and then you can star protesting for how other people call your side.
Our group splits the shares of treasure with a 'consumable' pool of treasure. While we are still playing with the ratios (4.5 or 5 shares in a 4 PC group) it works for the amount of comsumables required. Additionally, this way if someone dies it comes out of the party treasure share and not their own. - Gauss
A question for the "the good of the group first" guys. How you manage things like the scrolls and wand charges that the spellcasters or UMD guys use up on the group behalf? And the other expendables (potions, missile ammunitions and so on)?If the effect of the crafting feats should be equally shared, I don't see why the cost shouldn't be equally shared. A thing like a wand of CLW, Fireball or Black tentacles is used for the group good, so why it count in the user WBL and in his share of the loot?
Wouldn't be logic to pool all the expendables and distribute then to the people that can use them free of charge?More or less what my groups do, but how far do you go in this?
As you are advocating some kind of perfect WBL balance, how are treated the wands or staffs (they are permanent but with the charge limit they are used for party good, not for the good for the single player) and all other items that are consumed for the party.You pool all the consumables (arrows,...
My 'side'? I have been rather isolated on this and not part of either of the major 'sides'. I am not part of the 'crafters should do it for free' nor am I part of the 'crafters should be allowed to charge' camps. My 'camp' (as much as there is one) is the 'WBL' camp. In this I appear to be nearly alone. However, this is irrelevant as we are only responsible for our own conduct. My conduct has not once included anything remotely close to an insult. I do not make this personal. However, at least one person has called me (specifically) a Marxist communist AND while referrencing communist GMs who do audits (he labeled me this first) have called said GMs nazis. Considering this person primarily called me one and I have yet to insult anyone I think it is fair for me to ask the person to be civil.
I do not advocate 'perfect' WBL but only use it as a guideline. I do not try to make it perfect and I think such an exercise would be futile. I do however try to make it reasonably close (reasonably close btw varies by level). Regarding consumables nearly all consumables come out of the party share. The main variation in the 5th share is whether it is full or partial. We are playing with the balance there.
- Gauss
(Selgard's) proposed method is so full of assumption that it will work only for your group and groups like it.
It boil down to:
- a character feat are a communal property
- a character time is a communal property
- the group as never real downtime as they are always doing some group related thing.
You are perfectly right, I would find another group and especially another GM with which to play.
In other words, 'communism.'
I'm beginning to understand the 'no fee' side a little better, though I still don't agree.
My take on it is that the 'fee' groups disagree on the qualitative status of feats. The 'no fee' groups see all feats as equal and all directly related to the group's efficiency in combat. The 'fee' groups see the various craft feats as not directly contributing to efficiency in combat in the same fashion.
Fred Fighter can use almost all (if not all) of his feats directly in combat. Weapon proficency, weapon specialization, power attack, et all, are only useful in combat and only affect the group in combat. The same for Wally Wizard's metamagic feats. A case could be made that Calvin Cleric's channeling feats are useful out of combat, however, they cost him no downtime at all.
Carla Crafter, on the other hand, can only use her craft feats out of combat. She can't enchant Fred Fighter's armor or weapon in combat.
Craft feats, therefor do function differently than almost all other feats. That is the why of the 'fee' option. Not WBL, though that does affect the situation.
Now someone will bring up the diplomancer or the acqusistions expert. These, however, are skill-based, not feat-based. And there is nothing preventing Carla Crafter from filling one or more of those rolls as well.
Crafting is not required to complete the mission, but the skills and feats of Fred Fighter, Calvin Cleric, Barny Bard, Roger Rogue, and Ralph Ranger et all do, or at least are far more likely to, directly effect it.
IMO, and in that of the 'fee' group, Carla is providing a qualitatively different contribution by crafting than the rest of the group. This is the why of the 'fee'.
In other words, 'communism.'(Selgard's) proposed method is so full of assumption that it will work only for your group and groups like it.
It boil down to:
- a character feat are a communal property
- a character time is a communal property
- the group as never real downtime as they are always doing some group related thing.
You are perfectly right, I would find another group and especially another GM with which to play.
Calling Selgard a communist is so almost 700 posts ago. But you'd know that if you Johnny-come-latelys had bothered reading the thread when you jumped in just before post 1000.
The real disconnect is that Selgard and company prefer to play in parties that are more or less equivalent to MMO guilds. Hence the Khmer Rouge like expectation of absolute cooperation at all times. The other camp prefers to play in parties that more closely resemble a group of friends in real life but given heroic powers and tasks.
In Selgard's Khmer Rouge fantasy game a crafter refusing to give his 100% in and out combat is an enemy of the Party and ends up dead in a rice paddy somewhere.
In my party the time a crafter spends crafting is time he doesn't get to spend with his family, running his estate and pursuing his non-adventuring goals.
Since then my views have softened somewhat. Apparently not all MMO guilds are run like that.
(Selgard's) proposed method is so full of assumption that it will work only for your group and groups like it.
It boil down to:
- a character feat are a communal property
- a character time is a communal property
- the group as never real downtime as they are always doing some group related thing.
You are perfectly right, I would find another group and especially another GM with which to play.In other words, 'communism.'
Sometimes people play the game to immerse themselves into a character role. I have a character concept I'd like to advance, and its not always group oriented.
I guess I'm just lucky that the wizard in our party doesn't charge that extra amount, but still... if he did, I'd pay it without a fuss. I guess that's just me though.
Please remember to tip your wait staff ;)
It still sounds like you are still fixated on the possible greed aspect. Not all reasons for crafting fees are greed related. And just because someone doesn't tell the group that they can craft, it isn't...As to your "e-mail with the DM and hide it from the group" business.
No- I'd say you need to talk with your Dm about the issue instead of hiding from the group.
All you (the character- not You) is doing is hiding from the issue.
The figther taking a feat and never ever using it is just as wrong as the crafter taking it and never ever using it for the group. The issue in your case is the DM- not the rest of the players.You are saying "the group disagrees with me so screw them I'm going to just craft for myself and to hell with the group". I mean, when you boil it down, thats really what you are saying. i say you are better off not taking the crafting feat than dictating the terms to your group. If your group doesn't think a fee is acceptable for the group then it isn't acceptable.
I mean it'll go like this:
you find out your group doesn't like 10%.
You take the feats anyway and secretly craft when no on can see. (not sure how, but lets go with it anyway)
The group starts noticing you coming up with alot of things you shouldn't be able to afford that they havent' been seen dropping from the critters they been rolling.Now you have a really pissed off group. You are even *more* likely now to get left in the tavern than you were by just being up front about it all.
"crap hes been lying to us this whole time, and being a sneaky b**** about it too." "yeah and how do we even know he really crafted all this stuff? We never saw him do it. He could have just been stealin stuff off the side this entire time"You've taken a metagame issue used to solve a metagame problem and have turned it into a very real IC, ingame, RP problem for the group. Now you are a liar, and not a team player, and.. well.. IC the group would have to metagame to keep you a member of the party.
We don't necessarily know whats on each others sheet. but crafting something that costs 8k takes *8 days* of crafting of 8 hours a day. Thats 32-64 hours of crafting (depending on time available and the ability to double time and all that crap).
"hey what you doing""nothing"
".. dude you been intently doing nothing for two weeks."
then "hey he we found a headband of int +4, anyone want that"
"... cricktes..."
*party* "give it to the wizard, he's still wearing that +2 we found twelve levels ago"
" nah I already have one".
".... oooh so thats what you were working on.."
It doesn't exactly take a rocket scientist when folks are using magical items right and left that the group hasn't found. Genius level intellect isn't required to realize whats going on.
And yeah, I had let the thieving slide to some extent, but it came back when I started getting called head of the "slavery" party.
If you are my slave, then you are stealing from me.. sorry :) Its just the other side of the same cookie.
I said this probably 10 pages ago, I dunno:
I consider it theft. Plain, simple, and direct. I really do. You wanna know why I am on the side that I'm on- and that is really it.
You have a crafter deciding he gets to pocket extra cash for the group for taking his feat. I consider that stealing from the party. I really, honestly do.
I consider it *identical*- not close to but *identical* to anyone else in the group charging for their contribution to the group.'
Its not hyperbole or some exaggerated example.
I'd kick his butt to the curb just like I'd kick the rogue to the curb who was expecting 2gp for unlock the door or untrap the chest- or the cleric who was expecting to get paid for casting his spells.
I understand completely that you disagree. And I can even appreciate that. Our games apparently run completely differently. And I'm really fine with that too. Better than fine- actually. What works for your group is the right way for your group to play.
But to -me- it is theft, robbery, stealing, etc.. Thats just how I truly see it.
When folks talk about the fighter charging for power attack they get laughed at.. but I really see them as identical examples.
No member of the partnership is superior to any other. Everyone makes choices during the lifetime of their character. Presumably these decisions increase the effectiveness of the group. No one gets to charge extra to participate in the group. Not the fighter nor the cleric, rogue, wizard, or crafter. When they charge extra they are taking more than their share of the loot and are therefore stealing.
That is my opinion. I'm not saying it to annoy you or to be inflammatory or insulting. I'm saying it because to me- that is exactly what it is.
To go back to the "business partnership" example:
You have 5 guys in business for themselves. They need alot of graphic design done. They hire RD to come do the work. yay RD. Guy 3 realizes taht its cutting into the profit of the partnership and talks to the group. He goes and learns graphic design. The group pays for the parts equipmenta nd whatnot and guy 3 starts doing GD for the partnership. They quit using RD. (or use RD less)
Does guy 3 get to start charging the partnership part of the price difference of what the partnership is saving? No- he doesn't.
He does however get to enjoy the benefit of a more effective partnership.
to translate that over into D&D- the crafter is getting a benefit from his feat and so is the rest of the group. Just like the fighter getting power attack (should) mean less healing consumed by the group and the wizard taking X feat means the baddies go down easier, faster, or whatever. Just like the cleric taking extra channel means fewer CLW wands used, and the like.
Everyone in the group is participating and no one person gets to say "I made choice X and therefore you all owe me your gold to use it".
I've also said though that its up to the group. If the GROUP says 10% is fine, then the guy who thinks its theft (me) needs to 1) leave or 2) shut up and go along with the party or 3) make my own crafter and not charge myself 10%.
Likewise, if you (a charger) comes into a group taht leans more in my direction, you should expect to be told 10% is unreasonable and -you- should either 1) leave or 2) shut up and go along with the party or 3) not make a crafter so the issue isn't an issue anymore.
The real (not messageboard convo but actual) conflict comes into play when Me or You comes into each other's group and insists our way is right and that the group are a bunch of jerks.
When one guy tries to force the hand of what the group thinks is right/fair, then its not the group being a jerk. Its the one guy.
Whether its me joining your group or you joining mine.
Whether its a brand new campaign or you are joining at 10th level- the issue is the same. Discuss it with the group. Find out what the group thinks. Behave accordingly.
-S
You proposed method is so full of assumption that it will work only for your group and groups like it.
It boil down to:
- a character feat are a communal property
- a character time is a communal property
- the group as never real downtime as they are always doing some group related thing.You are perfectly right, I would find another group and especially another GM with which to play.
Am i the only one getting tired of the boards cutting off the actual text of what someone says when we click reply? I keep having to go back up find the post and copy/paste it myself. grr. annnyway
A character owns his or her character. But by joining the group, you are (presumably) agreeing to work with the group towards the group's ends.
Your feat isn't communal property. But why did you join the group, if not to join the group?
I have never said this. The character definately can (and should) have time to do their own things. But its also not unreasonable to expect the group to set aside some group time for group things as well.
I'm pretty sure I've said it before but the crafter should be crafting for themselves first. I'd even go so far as to say the group can and should set aside the same time they do for the group, for the caster to do their own thing. Heck I'll even say they could do it for crafting and researching spells and so on.
They are a group afterall. I'm not against everyone helping everyone out in all of their endeavors.
(our current group does just that, actually.. One guy owns a bar and likes to .. errm.. taxidermy.. the badguys and put them on display at the bar. he also likes to pose and Flesh to Stone some bad guys and ship them back home for the same purpose. The group cooperates, helping however we can.. just because he's our buddy, and we can help.. so we do)
There is always personal down time. (well not -always- but as much as can be fit into the time frame when you are trying to save the world-but thats much of an AP issue than anything else).
If we have time to spare (which happens occasionally if not exactly frequently) we look at what all we Have to do. We do it. Then we do the things we Want to do. Individuals can certainly have their own time. But there is a time for group things and a time for individual things. (we still largely don't let anyone go wandering off alone.. just because we are in "down time" doesn't mean the bad guys got the memo).
Very little of it has to do with the DM, honestly. Its up to the group to divvy up this sort of thing (to us) and he just sits back and watches. The Dm does dictate how much free time we have, however, he's just choosing not to alter the AP to give us more or less. (so far as I know anyway.. its not like I've read it)
-S
To go back to the "business partnership" example:
You have 5 guys in business for themselves. They need alot of graphic design done. They hire RD to come do the work. yay RD. Guy 3 realizes taht its cutting into the profit of the partnership and talks to the group. He goes and learns graphic design. The group pays for the parts equipmenta nd whatnot and guy 3 starts doing GD for the partnership. They quit using RD. (or use RD less)Does guy 3 get to start charging the partnership part of the price difference of what the partnership is saving? No- he doesn't.
He does however get to enjoy the benefit of a more effective partnership.
This analogy has a small flaw in it's implementation. Now Guy 3 is indeed saving the partnership money by doing design work "for the partnership". The destinction is that what if Guy 1 decides he would like Guy 3 to do a design for his personal use. Does Guy 3 not deserve the right to charge for this kind of side work.
I tend to look at creating an item for an individual party member in this manner. Sure, it makes him better. Indirectly when he is better, it also helps the group. However, it's still the individuals personal property and not that of the groups.
Does the payback have to be gold? Not necessarily. I'll do web design work for my friends sometimes for a case of beer (depending on the scope of the job of course). However, that case of beer has a market value that could also be attributed to gold.
I don't find being called a communist particularly insulting, inside this particular context, to be honest.
The real problems for communism were that they never actually exercised communism. Everyone wasn't equal- it was just the lie told to the masses while the guys on top robbed them blind, lived in huge houses with servants and ate the best foods all the while the serfs/peasants made do with.. well.. crap.
Communism works much better on a small scale when folks are actually contributing equally and getting an equal return on that work.
Which incidentally is how an adventuring party should work. Everyone works together. Everyone gets their share of the loot. Profit for all!
It only breaks down- much like the so-called communist governments in the real world, when some folks think their equal contribution is worth more.
Which incidentally is the crux of the whole thread :)
So yeah, being called a D&D communist doesn't bother me.
-S
To go back to the "business partnership" example:
You have 5 guys in business for themselves. They need alot of graphic design done. They hire RD to come do the work. yay RD. Guy 3 realizes taht its cutting into the profit of the partnership and talks to the group. He goes and learns graphic design. The group pays for the parts equipmenta nd whatnot and guy 3 starts doing GD for the partnership. They quit using RD. (or use RD less)Does guy 3 get to start charging the partnership part of the price difference of what the partnership is saving? No- he doesn't.
He does however get to enjoy the benefit of a more effective partnership.This analogy has a small flaw in it's implementation. Now Guy 3 is indeed saving the partnership money by doing design work "for the partnership". The destinction is that what if Guy 1 decides he would like Guy 3 to do a design for his personal use. Does Guy 3 not deserve the right to charge for this kind of side work.
I tend to look at creating an item for an individual party member in this manner. Sure, it makes him better. Indirectly when he is better, it also helps the group. However, it's still the individuals personal property and not that of the groups.
Does the payback have to be gold? Not necessarily. I'll do web design work for my friends sometimes for a case of beer (depending on the scope of the job of course). However, that case of beer has a market value that could also be attributed to gold.
The difference is that I see them as very different things.
When guy comes to the GD and askes for something to be made for his kid's school project, GD gets *nothing* out of it. Not one dang thing except possible good will. Now if Guy is honest, he'll offer to pay- even if GD isn't asking him to.
The guy in the group though is getting something out of it. He's making the group better. Making the barbarian's +1 into a +3 (or whatever) is directly boosting the effectiveness of the party just like any other item he makes (for himself or the group).
I grant that its making the barbarian something for his personal property not the groups. But the same is really true for all the feats powers and ability that someone gets.
A wizard owns his spells, spellbook, and items- but the presumption is that he joined the group to use them on the group's behalf.
Contrast that to an NPC you hire to come cast spells for you. he's following you- he gets no share of the loot- and he charges you everytime he contributes to the party. Whether its down time combat time or whaever time.
-S
The guy in the group though is getting something out of it. He's making the group better. Making the barbarian's +1 into a +3 (or whatever) is directly boosting the effectiveness of the party just like any other item he makes (for himself or the group).
Except it is not a direct boost.. It is an indirect one. A direct boost would be like a staff or scroll of teleport or communal protection from evil. Which if the the party is not assisting the crafter monetarily in creating, they are hosing the crafter.
I understand that your group operates in a psuedo-communist manner where everyone is precieved to be contributing *and being compensated* equally (although from what you described about your group, this isnt actually true). However, thats not how every group works. And, in a world such as pathfinder that operates in a market system, charging for crafted goods makes sense (especially with the OP's character concept).
*edit* added some clarification after an initial re-read.
|
The fact of the matter is there is meta-gaming going on, pure and simple.
I was looking at the Appraise skill and you can only know the value of a common with in 20% of it's actual value, not it's creation price. So if you rolled an Appraise DC 20 check and made it then you would know that you are getting a wonderful discount. Unless you are a crafter yourself, you do not know the creation cost. No matter how you try and spin an "in game" reason, there isn't one actually, unless again you are a crafter yourself.
I can't believe some actually mentioned the fighter and his investment in feats in this whole situation. Your bonus feats as a fighter are "combat" feats only and you are playing a fighter for god sakes. If you are going to focus on something else and not fighting then why would you even choose the class to start with? Sure you can mix up your build to do a bit of both but using a fighter not investing in in combat as your argument is just stupid. That's like saying "Well my Gunslinger could have invested in something else instead of guns".
PS: Please give me an "in game" reason that would even give you any kind of indication that he isn't creating it according to what the core rule book says. What makes your character stop and wonder if the crafter is charging me more. All you have to go by is what the shops sell it for and they sell it for more.
Edit: Now if the crafter in question is known for cheating people then I could see that as an excuse to question he charging therefore an Appraise check would come in to play but it would still only tell you that you are getting a discount. His alignment is LN so I am sure his PC isn't known for being a cheat.
The fact of the matter is there is meta-gaming going on, pure and simple.
I was looking at the Appraise skill and you can only know the value of a common with in 20% of it's actual value, not it's creation price. So if you rolled an Appraise DC 20 check and made it then you would know that you are getting a wonderful discount. Unless you are a crafter yourself, you do not know the creation cost. No matter how you try and spin an "in game" reason, there isn't one actually, unless again you are a crafter yourself.
I can't believe some actually mentioned the fighter and his investment in feats in this whole situation. Your bonus feats as a fighter are "combat" feats only and you are playing a fighter for god sakes. If you are going to focus on something else and not fighting then why would you even choose the class to start with? Sure you can mix up your build to do a bit of both but using a fighter not investing in in combat as your argument is just stupid. That's like saying "Well my Gunslinger could have invested in something else instead of guns".
PS: Please give me an "in game" reason that would even give you an kind of indication that he isn't creating it according to what the core rule book says. What makes your character stop and wonder if the crafter is charging me more. All you have to go by is what the shops sell it for and they sell it for more.
Edit: Now if the crafter in question is known for cheating people then I could see that as an excuse to question he charging therefore an Appraise check would come in to play but it would still only tell you that you are getting a discount. His alignment is LN so I am sure his PC isn't known for being a cheat.
Let me take a swing at this as well. What Selgard is saying is that he -in game- knows what someone else will pay for a used item the group looted from somewhere. He knows, in game, what he paid for an item he bought, and what it will fetch when he sells it. That's his in-game reason to think the crafter should make the item for him at that same used price.
What the 'fee' group (mine, btw) is saying is the price a used item fetches does not translate into what it costs to make it in-game, unless his character is also a crafter or has knowledge of crafting from his character's backstory. So, Fred Fighter, ex-farmer, should not know what it costs to make the item. What Carla Crafter is saying, to the 'fee' group, is "Folks, I can make stuff for you and me for much less than those shopkeepers want. I'll charge you x% over what we'd get by selling one to them, which is much less than they'll charge new. Deal?"
The 'no fee' group' then starts accusing Carla Crafter of stealing from them for not making the item for them at whatever the cost of the materials. That's where, imho, the metagaming starts. Fred Farmer should not know how much it costs to make, therefor he can't know that Carla is 'stealing' from him by charging over used sale cost.
Just a side note: with the PCs only sell for half-price, even the most potent artifact will not get them it's full value. Any of the Seven Swords of Sin will sell for half price [edit] and cost you full price to buy back.
|
|
Let me take a swing at this as well. What Selgard is saying is that he -in game- knows what someone else will pay for a used item the group looted from somewhere. He knows, in game, what he paid for an item he bought, and what it will fetch when he sells it. That's his in-game reason to think the...The fact of the matter is there is meta-gaming going on, pure and simple.
I was looking at the Appraise skill and you can only know the value of a common with in 20% of it's actual value, not it's creation price. So if you rolled an Appraise DC 20 check and made it then you would know that you are getting a wonderful discount. Unless you are a crafter yourself, you do not know the creation cost. No matter how you try and spin an "in game" reason, there isn't one actually, unless again you are a crafter yourself.
I can't believe some actually mentioned the fighter and his investment in feats in this whole situation. Your bonus feats as a fighter are "combat" feats only and you are playing a fighter for god sakes. If you are going to focus on something else and not fighting then why would you even choose the class to start with? Sure you can mix up your build to do a bit of both but using a fighter not investing in in combat as your argument is just stupid. That's like saying "Well my Gunslinger could have invested in something else instead of guns".
PS: Please give me an "in game" reason that would even give you an kind of indication that he isn't creating it according to what the core rule book says. What makes your character stop and wonder if the crafter is charging me more. All you have to go by is what the shops sell it for and they sell it for more.
Edit: Now if the crafter in question is known for cheating people then I could see that as an excuse to question he charging therefore an Appraise check would come in to play but it would still only tell you that you are getting a discount. His alignment is LN so I am sure his PC isn't known for being a cheat.
Unless you are specifically a crafter, you are not going to know what the "creation" price is. Also, just because you bought an item from Joe the Merchant in Peacetown doesn't mean you are going to get it at the same price from Bob the Merchant over in Jeckylsville. In game, you can't base your assumption off of what one merchant sold you in one city.
The fact of the matter is there is meta-gaming going on, pure and simple.
I was looking at the Appraise skill and you can only know the value of a common with in 20% of it's actual value, not it's creation price. So if you rolled an Appraise DC 20 check and made it then you would know that you are getting a wonderful discount. Unless you are a crafter yourself, you do not know the creation cost. No matter how you try and spin an "in game" reason, there isn't one actually, unless again you are a crafter yourself.
I can't believe some actually mentioned the fighter and his investment in feats in this whole situation. Your bonus feats as a fighter are "combat" feats only and you are playing a fighter for god sakes. If you are going to focus on something else and not fighting then why would you even choose the class to start with? Sure you can mix up your build to do a bit of both but using a fighter not investing in in combat as your argument is just stupid. That's like saying "Well my Gunslinger could have invested in something else instead of guns".
PS: Please give me an "in game" reason that would even give you an kind of indication that he isn't creating it according to what the core rule book says. What makes your character stop and wonder if the crafter is charging me more. All you have to go by is what the shops sell it for and they sell it for more.
Edit: Now if the crafter in question is known for cheating people then I could see that as an excuse to question he charging therefore an Appraise check would come in to play but it would still only tell you that you are getting a discount. His alignment is LN so I am sure his PC isn't known for being a cheat.
I'd like to see this as well. A post of mine eluding to something similar got ignored. I'm not saying it was intentional but it did go unanswered. In this deluge of a thread, though, it's understandable. But, if my guy comes to you and says "I'll make your 50k gp item for 35k gp" I can only see how your character would think "sweet!" unless, of course, they don't have 35k gp. If they tell my character they only have 30k gp then that's open to discussion. But, if they shoot back and say it should only cost 25k gp then my guy would probably respond along the lines of "well, since you know what it costs you should know how to do it so go make it yourself." If your character has the expertise to know how much it costs it's a reasonable assumption they also know what needs to be done and can therefore do it themselves and are just being lazy. Furthermore, another character telling my character how much it should cost could also be seen as a swindler by telling my guy to make it at cost with nothing left for him except a wasted couple months.
|
|
I'd like to see this as well. A post of mine eluding to something similar got ignored. I'm not saying it was intentional but it did go unanswered. In this deluge of a thread, though, it's understandable. But, if my guy comes to you and says "I'll make your 50k gp item for 35k gp" I can only see how your...The fact of the matter is there is meta-gaming going on, pure and simple.
I was looking at the Appraise skill and you can only know the value of a common with in 20% of it's actual value, not it's creation price. So if you rolled an Appraise DC 20 check and made it then you would know that you are getting a wonderful discount. Unless you are a crafter yourself, you do not know the creation cost. No matter how you try and spin an "in game" reason, there isn't one actually, unless again you are a crafter yourself.
I can't believe some actually mentioned the fighter and his investment in feats in this whole situation. Your bonus feats as a fighter are "combat" feats only and you are playing a fighter for god sakes. If you are going to focus on something else and not fighting then why would you even choose the class to start with? Sure you can mix up your build to do a bit of both but using a fighter not investing in in combat as your argument is just stupid. That's like saying "Well my Gunslinger could have invested in something else instead of guns".
PS: Please give me an "in game" reason that would even give you an kind of indication that he isn't creating it according to what the core rule book says. What makes your character stop and wonder if the crafter is charging me more. All you have to go by is what the shops sell it for and they sell it for more.
Edit: Now if the crafter in question is known for cheating people then I could see that as an excuse to question he charging therefore an Appraise check would come in to play but it would still only tell you that you are getting a discount. His alignment is LN so I am sure his PC isn't known for being a cheat.
Even Appraise only gives you the actual value with in 20%.
Since then my views have softened somewhat. Apparently not all MMO guilds are run like that.The real disconnect is that Selgard and company prefer to play in parties that are more or less equivalent to MMO guilds. Hence the Khmer Rouge like expectation of absolute cooperation at all times. The other camp prefers to play in parties that more closely resemble a group of friends in real life but given heroic powers and tasks.
In Selgard's Khmer Rouge fantasy game a crafter refusing to give his 100% in and out combat is an enemy of the Party and ends up dead in a rice paddy somewhere.
In my party the time a crafter spends crafting is time he doesn't get to spend with his family, running his estate and pursuing his non-adventuring goals.
Someone at our game Saturday Night made the same comment, actually. Something to the effect of, "It's all these MMO brats playing tabletop now that don't know how to roleplay and want to dictate what you do with your character for the good of the guild."
I don't find being called a communist particularly insulting, inside this particular context, to be honest.
The real problems for communism were that they never actually exercised communism.
No, it breaks down when the workers have no incentive to work, and the people profiting from the work demand the worker reaps no rewards.
Like this: (which you keep conveniently skipping over)
Except that its a false premise to say that its metagaming for him to know the actual value (and therefore, what half of that value) is.If the guy has the appropriate knowledge skills, and makes an appropriate roll, he can indeed know the cost to craft an item. It is absolutely fundamentally metagaming for him to know that I have Hedge Magician on my character sheet.
My problem is that its metagaming to solve a metagame problem.
In Character:
"I am Frank Fighter, Hear me roar. Point me at the bad guys and I will cleave them in twain."
"I am Bobby Barbarian. Hear me ROAR! Point me at.. nearly anyting, and I'll attack it like a rabid dog.. roar!"
"I am Roddy Rogue. Point me at a locked box, trapped door, or someone being distractedd by those two dumb thugs, and let me at 'em!"
"I am Cindy Crafter. I'll blow thigns up inc ombat and charge you extra to make you magical items."
"collective ......"I love how you completely red herring'd Cindy. Lets try the truth for a change.
Cindy: "My name is Cindy Crafter, and I can save you 40% over buying something at the store."
Group: "FORTY PERCENT IS NOT ENOUGH I DEMAND FIFTY PERCENT."
Cindy: "...."
next session:
Cindy's Player: "I have dumped Cindy and rolled up a Barbarian. I demand that you guys craft things for me at 50% off."
Now nobody gets their 50% off items. See how aggressively overbearing Communism kills the golden goose?
This is why adventuring parties should have contracts specifying ahead of time what each person will contribute, and what they will get as a reward. :P
This really comes down to a debate between subjective vs. objective theories of value. That one has been raging for decades.
This is why adventuring parties should have contracts specifying ahead of time what each person will contribute, and what they will get as a reward. :P
I'm unsure if this was made in jest so I will response as if it were not. This is too metagamey for me. Even in Star Wars table top when I and others played Jedi, I've never been in a previously established party. People have always been assembled ad-hoc so any out of game construct to dictate in game behavior would be unacceptable to me. If the group were already established prior to the first game session, that's different. I could then reasonably see players hashing out what behaviors they've come to expect from each other during their time together.
This is why adventuring parties should have contracts specifying ahead of time what each person will contribute, and what they will get as a reward. :P
Yes, because a legally binding contract is what you want to do in a Tavern when you meet up.
"Me, the Great and Powerful, Bobby Barbarian, agree to this contract, but would like to include into it as Amendment 42 Subsection C, that after we Crush our enemies and watch them driven before us that we hear the Lamentation of the Women next <BUURRRPPP> More Ale!"