How Much Wealth Should Be Crafted?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 266 of 266 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

I should have stated: process regarding time per 1000gp is accelerated. This is as opposed to the process of the types of time being accelerated.

And yes, there is a speed at which you spend the gold when you spend 1000gp per 8hours or 1000gp per 4hours accelerated.

Hmmm, spending it at the start of the process is not written anywhere that I can find (not that it does not make sense).

- Gauss

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

1a) "The creator also needs a fairly quiet, comfortable, and well-lit place in which to work. Any place suitable for preparing spells is suitable for making items." Conditions needed to work

2a) "Creating an item requires 8 hours of work per 1,000 gp in the item's base price (or fraction thereof), with a minimum of at least 8 hours. Potions and scrolls are an exception to this rule; they can take as little as 2 hours to create (if their base price is 250 gp or less). Scrolls and potions whose base price is more than 250 gp, but less than 1,000 gp, take 8 hours to create, just like any other magic item." Speed at which you produce the item.

3a) "The character must spend the gold at the beginning of the construction process." Time at which you spend the gold for the whole process.

4a) "Regardless of the time needed for construction, a caster can create no more than one magic item per day." Limit to the daily production.

5a) "This process can be accelerated to 4 hours of work per 1,000 gp in the item's base price (or fraction thereof) by increasing the DC to create the item by +5." It refer to step 2 (crafting speed), that refer to step 1 for the conditions.


Please bold the section where Step 2 references step 1. I do not see any section where Step 2 references step 1.

For a moment lets assume Step 2 does reference step 1. How then do you use crafting while adventuring or distracted since (according to you) step 2 references step 1 and crafting while adventuring or distracted is an exception to step 1. It would seem to create an impossible situation in your diagram.

If you must use step 2 which must use step 1 in order to craft then Crafting while adventuring or distracted has no rules for step 2. However, if you are using step 2 which then references an ALTERNATE step 1 then the rules for 3, 4, and 5 are still accurate.

- Gauss

P.S. thanks for pointing out #3, I see it now. :)

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

And Gauss, about the Rope trick, remember that its volume is very strange. You said: "Regarding elbow space, there is approximately 225square feet (enough space to fit 8 people +the hole = 15x15 space)." but the spell description say something very different:
"The space holds as many as eight creatures (of any size)."
Put that way a wizard and his tiny familiar count as 2 creatures, but a druid with a large animal companion count as 2 creatures too.
Apparently the space resize itself based on the number, size and shape of the creatures in it.
I recall a comment about that (probably in a old Dragon) but can't pinpoint it.
I suspect that if you have less that 8 persons you don't get free space, simply the rope trick would expand less.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
tennengar wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Except that your belt of strength wouldn't "double your output" all it would do would be to add +1 to str related checks and put in a modest improvement on carry capacity. Given that the average dock worker probably makes at most 1 or 2 gold pieces a day, does it really make sense to get ONE item for one person instead of of purchasing 2,000 man/days? I'll get much more work done with the extra personnel than than the slight increase to one commoner's capabilities.

Which all sounds peachy except I was talking about muleback cords not belts of strength so your price is wrong and and effects are wrong, so your logic is wrong.

Let me refresh your memory...

tennengar wrote:
As I said a tiny hamlet couldnt afford a 'multi-thousand gp item' so you're defeating my argument by changing the scale of it to fit your opinion... Then you flip sides and say that hiring a bunch more workers is less expensive over time than a one time investment in some muleback cords that your existing workers could use ad infinitum...

Muleback cords? Then you're going to get even LESS return. The only thing that muleback cords allow you to do is to overstuff a backpack, they give you no help when it comes to hauling freight around in large containers. Again, it still would be far cheaper to hire more laborers than it would be to purchase even ONE of these items. The cords retail for 1,000 gold, you could pay for 3330 man/days of trained workers at 3 sp/day. and that's for ONE set of cords.


Diego Rossi: Bloody hell, you are right. I must be falling asleep lately (actually, I have but thats another discussion). Well, I always count it as 8 medium creatures minimum. It simply doesnt make sense any other way.

- Gauss


Gauss wrote:

Diego Rossi: Bloody hell, you are right. I must be falling asleep lately (actually, I have but thats another discussion). Well, I always count it as 8 medium creatures minimum. It simply doesn't work the way I want it to any other way.

- Gauss

Fixed that for you.

But seriously... we're talking about folding space to make an extradimensional pocket... and the idea that it's flexible on volume doesn't make sense?

It would seem to make sense [to me] that the pocket only expands to the minimum degree needful to house its occupants. Based on an entirely biased opinion that reality doesn't like getting kicked around by wizards, and would grudgingly make the minimum adaptation possible...

Mind you, I would probably let you pack mass=8 medium creatures into a rope trick without too much trouble.

Finally... and here we dip back into the ridiculous RAW/RAI Endless Debate [tm]... but it's awfully obtuse and disingenuous to assert that the required "heat source" for crafting NOT be anything other than the typically-required heat source for mundane crafting of the type one is pursuing magically. Just sayin'.


Alitan, your fixes are offensive because I meant what I said. How can you assume what I meant to say? Now, if you wanted to refute what I said that is fine, but intentionally rewording a quote is offensive. Yes, I should have said 'to me' but that does not mean you should reword what I said.

Additionally, I did not state that a candle is all _I_ would require. But since people like to argue RAW so much I am responding to that in kind. And in RAW it is neither obtuse nor nor disingenuous to state what RAW states. It is RAW that a heat source is required without stating what defines a heat source. Once again, I stated that RAI is an appropriate heat source but that will have table variations as different GMs determine what that means.

- Gauss


I didn't think you didn't mean what you said, Gauss; but when what you're saying is not in line with the description of the spell under discussion, there's some room for inference about the underpinnings of why you're saying it.

In any case, I do apologize; wasn't meant as more than a nudge-in-the-ribs kind of way, certainly not to give offense.

Likewise, though, I did go on to say that I wouldn't grief you (or anybody) about dragging stuff into the rope trick rather than limiting stuff to the gear-out of creatures heading into it.

Finally, "responding to [a bad habit] in kind" isn't particularly productive. Hairsplitting RAW vs. RAI arguments get tedious quickly. As I'm sure you're aware. Using a ridiculous read of a rule in a debate (no offense meant here -- but I do find heat source (for metalwork, as a particular)=candle a rather ridiculous read) doesn't further the discussion.


LazarX wrote:
Muleback cords? Then you're going to get even LESS return. The only thing that muleback cords allow you to do is to overstuff a backpack, they give you no help when it comes to hauling freight around in large containers. Again, it still would be far cheaper to hire more laborers than it would be to purchase even ONE of these items. The cords retail for 1,000 gold, you could pay for 3330 man/days of trained workers at 3 sp/day. and that's for ONE set of cords.

Lets say I have a choice. 3 burly dockworkers with strength of 12 (nyuk nyuk) or 1 burly dockworker with a strength of 12 and some muleback cords that I had to pay for up front.

Carrying capacity is all muleback cords do but they make any carrying capacity go up by around 3 to 1... And carrying capacity does seem like it comes in to play quite a bit for dockworkers... So it'll take 3 schmoes to match the work of my 1 mulebacked stevedore. I've paid the 3 unassisted ones 9 silver for their work. I've paid my assited worker the 3sp for his day but he did just as much work as the 3 other guys combined.

Even if the cost of the muleback cords were in my hands lets play it out...

After 5 years of these guys working for me I've paid the 3 unassisted dockworkers 16425 in silver for their efforts. After 5 years I've paid the single muleback worker 5475+the 10000sp for the cords... Despite each team doing the same amount of work my muleback stevedore is already 950 silver cheaper and the gap only gets bigger the longer I operate because the cords belong to me. Any dock administrator in business for more than 5 years would be making money hand over fist with magic dockworkers. This math scales no matter what strength score i give the sample dockworkers.

Granted thats only a half a silver a day each day for 5 years, but lets say instead I have 30 dockworkers vs 10 muleback stevedores... now i'm making 5 silver pieces a day without having to lift a finger which is more than any of my stevedores are getting paid, and the longer it goes on the more profitable it is now that all the muleback cords are all paid off.


Alitan, thanks for the apology.

Regarding the hairsplitting. It is not hair splitting as much as it is playing via the rules (ie: Strictly RAW) that people seem to debate with. I am more than happy to state how it would play in my game except that people would then tear that apart as 'not RAW'. So, when they go there, as some were, I have no choice but to make the RAW case and THEN state that it is up to your GM (as always).

Since magic item crafting is not allowed in PFS this is really an area where each and every GM is going to have his own take and they will all be vastly different.

- Gauss

Silver Crusade

Alitan wrote:

I didn't think you didn't mean what you said, Gauss; but when what you're saying is not in line with the description of the spell under discussion, there's some room for inference about the underpinnings of why you're saying it.

In any case, I do apologize; wasn't meant as more than a nudge-in-the-ribs kind of way, certainly not to give offense.

Likewise, though, I did go on to say that I wouldn't grief you (or anybody) about dragging stuff into the rope trick rather than limiting stuff to the gear-out of creatures heading into it.

Finally, "responding to [a bad habit] in kind" isn't particularly productive. Hairsplitting RAW vs. RAI arguments get tedious quickly. As I'm sure you're aware. Using a ridiculous read of a rule in a debate (no offense meant here -- but I do find heat source (for metalwork, as a particular)=candle a rather ridiculous read) doesn't further the discussion.

Exactly.

It's down to someone gaming the system and just looking at the words.


tennengar wrote:
mcv wrote:
There being an item for sale does not mean the buyer is just as easy to find. The item being for sale means that the merchant expects that he'll be able to sell that item, but he can be wrong, and the buyer might not be in the city right now. He could be counting on traveling adventurers just like the PCs, for example. Maybe, if the PCs are high level and reasonably well known, he could be counting on the PCs themselves.
Now you're just throwing up arbitrary roadblocks and obstacles, all which although logical and reasonable are things that don't happen at our table since nobody at the table wants to sit through an episode of merchants and merchandise, and all which would encourage players not to want to take crafting feats which is your perogative... Its not hard to come up with a table called 'a hundred excuses for why a player could never get full price from a crafted item" but our table doesnt try so hard to stymie crafting as much (from your perspective 'make the market more realistic') but neither is wrongbadfun.

Ah, you want to have your cake and eat it too. You want the aspects of realism that are profitable to you, but you don't want the associated equally realistic hassle.

Of course at your table you can change any price and any rule in the game if that's what your table wants, but that exploitation of selective realism is hardly good advice for groups in general.

There are very good realistic reasons why an adventurer can't easily sell his stuff for full price. But if your table wants big bags of money to drop out of the sky for no apparent reason, by all means, go for it. It's your game, your fun.


tennengar wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Muleback cords? Then you're going to get even LESS return. The only thing that muleback cords allow you to do is to overstuff a backpack, they give you no help when it comes to hauling freight around in large containers. Again, it still would be far cheaper to hire more laborers than it would be to purchase even ONE of these items. The cords retail for 1,000 gold, you could pay for 3330 man/days of trained workers at 3 sp/day. and that's for ONE set of cords.

Lets say I have a choice. 3 burly dockworkers with strength of 12 (nyuk nyuk) or 1 burly dockworker with a strength of 12 and some muleback cords that I had to pay for up front.

Carrying capacity is all muleback cords do but they make any carrying capacity go up by around 3 to 1... And carrying capacity does seem like it comes in to play quite a bit for dockworkers... So it'll take 3 schmoes to match the work of my 1 mulebacked stevedore. I've paid the 3 unassisted ones 9 silver for their work. I've paid my assited worker the 3sp for his day but he did just as much work as the 3 other guys combined.

Even if the cost of the muleback cords were in my hands lets play it out...

After 5 years of these guys working for me I've paid the 3 unassisted dockworkers 16425 in silver for their efforts. After 5 years I've paid the single muleback worker 5475+the 10000sp for the cords... Despite each team doing the same amount of work my muleback stevedore is already 950 silver cheaper and the gap only gets bigger the longer I operate because the cords belong to me. Any dock administrator in business for more than 5 years would be making money hand over fist with magic dockworkers. This math scales no matter what strength score i give the sample dockworkers.

Two things you're ignoring here:

One: your muleback cord is up-front cost. Unlike the salaries of the dockworkers, you can't pay it out of the profits of your operation, you have to invest that money up front. And it means you can't invest that money somewhere else. And if it gets stolen, you lose that investment and have to buy another muleback cord. And that brings me to problem two:

Five years is a long time. How many muleback cords will be stolen in that time? For a small 1000 gp item to be running loose on the docks, you're going to need trustworthy guards, and those are likely a lot more expensive than those two extra dockworkers.


tennengar wrote:
mcv wrote:
Personally I'd like to say that magic items are so expensive because they are so rare, but when magic item creation is reliable and accessible, that doesn't really work anymore.But if item crafting is common and there is a reliable market, then selling prices should plummet to just above cost. If they don't, there clearly have to be a lot of hidden costs involved. The risk of not selling an item is a pretty big one here, but with magic items being so expensive, they're also prime targets for thieves. Anyone dealing in expensive magic items would need really good magical protection and the best guards the city has to offer. Any PC suspected of owning magic items would attract the attention of every thief in the city.
Personally i'd like to think that the guy running the docks is only in charge of such an operation because he's got the tools to keep his baliwick in safe sound running order,

Most likely he's going to be smart enough not to give expensive magic items away, and to protect the ones he has.

If you want to keep your docks crime free in the face of easily stealable magic items, you're going to need your own private city. Anyone doing business in a real city will have to deal with the realities of that city. Of course you could decide that in your world everybody is noble and honest and there is no crime. Personally I like a bit of a criminal element in my fantasy settings, though.

tennengar wrote:
mcv wrote:
From a world-building point of view, I wouldn't mind getting rid of crafting. It makes magic too mundane. Instead, make the creation of any item a quest in itself.
Clearly. On the other hand the back of the core book says 'Enter a fantastic world of adventure' and inside is a big old huge list of magic items...

Exactly. Fantastic adventure, not a world of magic-fueled industry. I prefer my magic to be fantastic rather than mundane.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

tennengar, a big investment is valid only if it has a good return. 10.000 sp to get 365 sp/year (I assume you get people to use the cords in shift, so that it is in use up to 16 hours/day) is a low return for a business.
The profit in reality would be higher as we can suppose you get a profit from your activity, so you should get more for each worker of what you pay them.
Probably an item that can cast Ant haul 5 times a day (when you really need it) and that will stay in the owner hands would be a better investment, even if it would have a higher cost up front. Protecting it from theft or accidents would be way easier.

Cranes pulleys and carts would be a less expensive option to do that if you are using a legitimate dock. Smugglers or pirates and ship wreckers interested in looting rapidly a sinking ships would find them very interesting instead.
The limitations of substituting magic items for mundane solutions is that generally the up front cost of magic items is high and they are easy to steal, so they are worth using only if your activity has a high return and you are already paying for security in a way or another (i.e. you have a security system or you are the guy that make other people pay for a security system).

251 to 266 of 266 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / How Much Wealth Should Be Crafted? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.